MediaWiki talk:Community Portal: Difference between revisions

From MediaWiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
Khajidha (talk | contribs)
IGEBM13 (talk | contribs)
 
Line 1: Line 1:
__NEWSECTIONLINK__
__NEWSECTIONLINK__


This is the place for discussion of topics that affect the entire wiki. Some topics that would ordinarily be here have merited their own pages:
This is the place for discussion of topics that affect the entire wiki. For less wide-reaching subjects, either use articles' individual talk pages or [https://discord.com/invite/N99Bygq our Discord server.]
 
Some topics that would ordinarily be here have merited their own pages:


{{chapters|title=Specific Discussion Subjects|align=left|content=
{{chapters|title=Specific Discussion Subjects|align=left|content=
Line 23: Line 25:
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/GoBots|Discussion on the place of GoBots in this wiki]]
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/GoBots|Discussion on the place of GoBots in this wiki]]
<br/> <div class="list-header">'''Wiki Technical Information:'''</div>
<br/> <div class="list-header">'''Wiki Technical Information:'''</div>
* [[Transformers_Wiki:Tech|A Not So Brief Summary of the Horrible Things That McFly and Co. Have Done To Keep This Wiki From Melting Down]]
* [[Transformers Wiki:Tech|A Not So Brief Summary of the Horrible Things That McFly and Co. Have Done To Keep This Wiki From Melting Down]]
}}<br/>
}}<br/>
<!--BEGIN ARCHIVE NAV INCLUDE-->
<!--BEGIN ARCHIVE NAV INCLUDE-->
Line 29: Line 31:
<!--END ARCHIVE NAV INCLUDE-->
<!--END ARCHIVE NAV INCLUDE-->


== IDW Revolution ==
So the preview for ''Rom'' #1 shows the EDC in it and we can probably expect more of this sort of thing. This could be a problem for recording stuff, since the EDC is a Transformers concept but if it becomes a ''Rom'' one too, we technically need to put a lot of Rom storylinks here.
So should we do a rule that it has to be ''specifically'' a Transformer appearing to get covered, and otherwise we'll put it in Notes ("the EDC also shoot Rom!!")? --[[User:Charles RB|Charles RB]] ([[User talk:Charles RB|talk]]) 17:17, 7 June 2016 (GMT)
:I think the closest thing we have to an existing standard is [[Unfoldings!|G.I. Joe #138]], a comic that is not an identified crossover with Transformers and contains the most minor of guest-appearances inside. The full issue is summarized on this site, and details of that issue appear in the fiction section of every character, even ones like [[Wild Bill]] who had no contact with Transformers whatsoever for the story.
:Beyond that "standard", though, you're right that we will need to establish a rule for when Hasbro/IDW Universe stories are covered. Only when Transformers appear in the issue? Transformers characters? Transformers concepts? If Blackrock appears in MASK #3, do we cover that issue based on that alone? What if there's also a one-panel flashback of Blackrock with Galvatron? Do we cover it then? --[[User:Xaaron|Xaaron]] ([[User talk:Xaaron|talk]]) 12:50, 7 June 2016 (EDT)
::My two cents. If it's not a piece of Transformers fiction, it generally only gets mentioned in the notes, even if a nominally-TF character appears. Major characters (you can decide who fits) can tip the scales, and situations like GI Joe #138 get included because that issue is essential to understanding issue #139 (where the crossover is first explicitly mentioned, but where the action is already well in play as the issue opens, and #138 is necessary to understand how we got there. Note also that a major TF character appears in #138, if only briefly). These general guidelines should be able to suffice for the most part. --[[User:G.B. Blackrock|G.B. Blackrock]] ([[User talk:G.B. Blackrock|talk]]) 13:32, 7 June 2016 (EDT)
:::Disagree on #138. It's completely unnecessary for understanding #139 ("Megatron is attacking the castle!" is pretty clearly conveyed by the splash page), and it actually ''confuses'' the situation, since the shadowy conversation in #138 is ignored or outright contradicted later in the story.
:::But regardless, that brings us back around to "What's a major character?" Only Transformers? Pre-IDW humans like Fairborne, Spike, and Blackrock as well? Jimmy Pink and Jones? What if Battle Force 2000 encounters the Enigma of Combination? What if MASK travels to Cybertron, but no identifiable Transformers appear? I realize a lot of these questions can't be answered until it happens, but some idea where everyone sits on the matter should be established ahead of time, if we can. --[[User:Xaaron|Xaaron]] ([[User talk:Xaaron|talk]]) 13:46, 7 June 2016 (EDT)
::::If it's not an explicit and branded crossover we should have minimal coverage. If an actual Transformer shows up in another book, we cover his appearance but that's it. 138 is probably covered in too much detail already. Transformers concepts and settings and human companions appearing in other books are notes. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 14:15, 7 June 2016 (EDT)
:::::I think if a Transformer or other Clearly A Transformers-Franchise Character like Blackrock, Marissa, Spike, etc. shows up in another title's issue, than that issue should get fully covered as a crossover regardless of "branding." A TF-originated ''concept'', however, like the EDC, putting in an appearance probably doesn't need to be more than a note somewhere. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC|KilMichaelMcC]] ([[User talk:KilMichaelMcC|talk]]) 14:49, 7 June 2016 (EDT)
::::::No. We don't cover every Marvel Comics issue Death's Head's shown up in following his departure from the TF universe. And before you "WELL ACTUALLY" me, he's only not a Fully Legal Transformers Character on the most petty of technicalities. He was made to be a Transformers character and given a legal out to be used elsewhere without paying Hasbro.<br>
::::::AT MOST, non-Transformers books should be lumped together in a fiction section on the franchise in question's page. Personally I have grave doubts as to just how much character bleed there actually will be, as well as how long any of these titles are even going to ''last''. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 15:03, 7 June 2016 (EDT)
:::::::WELL ACTUALLY another difference there is that, like you said, Death's Head ''departed'' the TF universe. He was taken away from the TF franchise and given to Marvel-at-large. This has not happened with say, Marissa Fairborn, who is still a Transformers character. Her "home title" is still The Transformers. A hypothetical Marissa Fairborn guest appearance in an issue of M.A.S.K. is, IMO, just as much of a TF crossover as an appearance of, say, Cosmos or Soundwave would be. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC|KilMichaelMcC]] ([[User talk:KilMichaelMcC|talk]]) 15:22, 7 June 2016 (EDT)
::::::::Which should still be relegated to a singular fiction section on the not-Transformers franchise page. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 15:41, 7 June 2016 (EDT)
:::::::But the fact that that legal out was ''created'' would, I think, make him a Marvel-by-way-of-Transformers character. He may have been ''created'' for Transformers, but he was also created to be ''used'' outside Transformers. Plus, uh, what Kil said.
:::::::My proposal: only issues with Transformers in get their own pages; any other appearances of TF characters and concepts go on a single page for the whole franchise/comic. Doesn't leave anything out, but also doesn't overstep the wiki's bounds. --[[User:Riptide|Riptide]] ([[User talk:Riptide|talk]]) 15:44, 7 June 2016 (EDT)
::::::::Death's Head's legal reality is exactly why he's in those non-Transformers stories in the first place; I don't think he's a good example. I think sticking to things that cannot exist out of a ''Transformers'' context (i.e. the Enigma of Combination, Optimus Prime, etc.) is a okay baseline. The EDC can always serve as a generic "defense against aggressive aliens" organization independent of Transformers, but things like the Matrix can't. [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 15:56, 7 June 2016 (EDT)
:::::Transformers get full writeups and bestow full writeup coverage on the issues in which they appear.  TF-originating non-TF characters and concepts (Spike, EDC, the Enigma, cosmic rust) get very brief mentions within the main bodies of their articles, in proper chronological order in the IDW Fiction sections, with storylinks properly annotated; these storylinks would be redirected to the main non-TF-franchise comic page.  IE "storylink|ROM #6" just goes to the ROM comic.  ROM (character) does not have any of his own adventures chronicled ever except when he's doing it right next to a Transformer, regardless of title.  --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] ([[User talk:Thylacine 2000|talk]]) 19:11, 7 June 2016 (EDT)
::::::"Transformers get full writeups and bestow full writeup coverage on the issues in which they appear." No. A one-panel cameo does not mean we write up the entire issue as its own article. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 19:34, 7 June 2016 (EDT)
:::::::We've got full pages for the non-Transformers Infestation comics and Unit:E, just putting that out there. It's not like covering issues in which Transformers appear is going to lead to people insisting we cover the entirety of okay actually I may be giving the average wiki user too much credit --[[User:Riptide|Riptide]] ([[User talk:Riptide|talk]]) 19:46, 7 June 2016 (EDT)
::::::::I'd much rather just lose the full page coverage for Unit E and non-TF Infestation than start giving it to all these new comics. -[[User:Foffy the Sheep|Foffy the Sheep]] ([[User talk:Foffy the Sheep|talk]]) 19:49, 7 June 2016 (EDT)
:::::::::BINGO. It's not before anymore. We live in a very different world than when a lot of this wiki's "standards" were crafted. What worked when TFs was a healthy-yet-niche franchise, perhaps not so much now that it's being used as a tentpole for a lot of other things. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 20:27, 7 June 2016 (EDT)
:::::::::Disagreed, I guess. I feel like if it's a book by a Hasbro licensee using their Transformers license to use Transformers in the story, it doesn't particularly matter what the name on the book is. Sure, if it's, like, a 1-panel flashback or something we wouldn't even mention otherwise, we can leave it out, but if they have a bigger role, it shouldn't need "The Transformers" on the cover to get a writeup. --[[User:Riptide|Riptide]] ([[User talk:Riptide|talk]]) 14:23, 8 June 2016 (EDT)
::::::I'm down with "Transformers get full writeups and bestow full writeup coverage on the issues in which they appear", with the caveat of "except when it's a minor cameo" (i.e. not Megatron showing up in Joe #138 as he's the cliffhanger but like how Nick Fury's making a cameo in TF #3 to go "look this guy's paying attention). Anything else goes in Notes unless & until it explicitly impacts on a Transformers comic, i.e. crossover stories. --[[User:Charles RB|Charles RB]] ([[User talk:Charles RB|talk]]} 04:05, 8 June 2016 GMT
::::::: Hum, so... Not a total coverage, got it. But some Locations have had their own articles just because they were in the Hasbro 'verse. All that Star Wars stuff for example is mostly unrelated. If there is such a thing like an official Hasbro 'verse... shouldn't we start to list planets from other continuities? Or does that also fall under the category of "only if a Transformer / EDC member ever puts his feet /wheels on it"? Other more precise locations may clearly not fit in here, but planets? I feel as if the Planets and stars existing in IDW's Rom are are much more observable from Earth or Cybertron than some other stuff we already have. Anyway, I'm just asking before I begin to do any unnecessary work.[[User:Xunk16|Xunk16]] ([[User talk:Xunk16|talk]]) 02:19, 23 September 2016 (EDT)
::::::::If it appears in an issue that we're covering (i.e. an issue with Transformers in), then it can get an article. If it doesn't, it doesn't. [[User:Jalaguy|Jalaguy]] ([[User talk:Jalaguy|talk]]) 04:23, 23 September 2016 (EDT)
==Gobots Sister Wiki Progress==
Has anyone ever made any progress on the Gobots sister wiki? I have no experience in creating wikis, but would love to see this get made. -[[User:Halfshell25|Halfshell25]] ([[User talk:Halfshell25|talk]]) 19:21, 22 June 2016 (EDT)
== "Foreign Names" ==
The original Mandarin names of the Chinese MMO characters are not their "foreign names" and it is factually inaccurate to label them as such. The AVP replacement names are actually the "foreign" ones.  --[[User:KilMichaelMcC|KilMichaelMcC]] ([[User talk:KilMichaelMcC|talk]]) 08:45, 14 July 2016 (EDT)
:Wouldn't the same objection apply to [[Ricochet (Headmasters)]] and the entirety of the Unicron Trilogy's characters? Perhaps a change to the title of the section would be appropriate, but I just read the heading as "names in a language other than English". --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] ([[User talk:Khajidha|talk]]) 09:16, 14 July 2016 (EDT)
::UT characters are in a much different position, since they were developed with both the English-speaking audience and the Japanese audience in mind, they weren't created for Japan and then imported elsewhere. I would also note that "Foreign names" isn't used to mean "names in a language other than English" on the Beastformers' articles, which list their English names under that header. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC|KilMichaelMcC]] ([[User talk:KilMichaelMcC|talk]]) 09:56, 14 July 2016 (EDT)
:::What kind of a change would you suggest?  Is it a matter of semantics, like we could change the headers to "International names"?  Personally, I never thought the "Foreign names" header intimated something suggesting that the names were "secondary", just that we use English language names where appropriate and list the international/foreign ones at the bottom where appropriate.  I don't think country of origin ever really factored into it.  And we use the Foreign names section even when characters have the same names across languages, but render them in that language's alphabet for ease of reference (admittedly, we've been rather sloppy about that, particularly the similar Foreign localization sections of episodes where sometimes we list a language's info and sometimes we don't).  While we could definitely stand to be more complete/precise across the board, I think altering the section titles based on country of origin would only confuse things for casual browsers. --[[User:DrSpengler|DrSpengler]] ([[User talk:DrSpengler|talk]]) 10:28, 14 July 2016 (EDT)
::::Honestly the main thing I wanna suggest is un-reverting the changes to the MMO characters back to "Original Mandarin Name" in place of "Foreign name" as that just more accurate, IMO. I also think that if the intent of the wiki is that "Foreign names" be read as "non-English names" then maybe "English" shouldn't actually appear under that header, as it does for Beastformers and Omni Producion dubs. And if "Foreign names" is actually supposed to mean "Names given to character in foreign markets" then should the name given in their ''original'' market actually be under there? Should a character's original name ever be labelled "foreign"? My gut instinct is to say "no" to that.  --[[User:KilMichaelMcC|KilMichaelMcC]] ([[User talk:KilMichaelMcC|talk]]) 11:16, 14 July 2016 (EDT)
:::::They are foreign to our main readership, which is primarily Americans. That's what it means, regardless of whether the character is a foreign creation. We've had examples like [[Ricochet (Headmasters)|Ricochet/Stepper]], [[Snowblind|Snowblind/Beacon]], and [[Optimus Prime (RID)|Optimus Prime/Fire Convoy]] for years. Why is this any different? [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 12:04, 14 July 2016 (EDT)
::::::I don't know! Maybe it isn't! Maybe all characters should always have their original name listed as such instead of just being under the "Foreign names" header! Maybe they shouldn't! Maybe! --[[User:KilMichaelMcC|KilMichaelMcC]] ([[User talk:KilMichaelMcC|talk]]) 12:16, 14 July 2016 (EDT)
::::::Foreign is always understood as being in relation to the speaker. As this wiki is English speaking, all non-English names are foreign, even if they are the original names for those characters. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] ([[User talk:Khajidha|talk]]) 12:11, 14 July 2016 (EDT)
:::::::Again, if "all non-English name are foreign" then maaaaaaaaybe the word "English" shouldn't be appearing beneath the "Foreign names" header on any articles? --[[User:KilMichaelMcC|KilMichaelMcC]] ([[User talk:KilMichaelMcC|talk]]) 12:19, 14 July 2016 (EDT)
::::::::That's a more valid point, though it is mainly used for the Omni Productions dub which is pretty foreign to anything close to English...or good.--[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] ([[User talk:Khajidha|talk]]) 12:23, 14 July 2016 (EDT)
:::::::::As we currently have it set up for English/Omni names, it looks like this:
*''English:'' '''Billy''' ([[Omni Productions]] dub), '''Blaster''' ([[Omni Productions]] dub Twincast)
While it seems pretty clear by having the Omni Productions note in parenthesis by the names, maybe it would look better like this?
*''English ([[Omni Productions]] dub):'' '''Billy''' (as Blaster), '''Blaster''' (as Twincast)
Is that better or worse or not even worth the effort?  Personally, I don't have a dog in this race; I kinda think things are okay as-is. --[[User:DrSpengler|DrSpengler]] ([[User talk:DrSpengler|talk]]) 12:35, 14 July 2016 (EDT)
:I was walking about the presence of "English" beneath a "Foreign names" header at all if the intended meaning of "Foreign names" is "non-English." So this isn't really addressing that? --[[User:KilMichaelMcC|KilMichaelMcC]] ([[User talk:KilMichaelMcC|talk]]) 12:45, 14 July 2016 (EDT)
::There isn't really any other good place for these names to go. Unless you want to elevate them to the level of legitimate English variants (like Hot Rod vs Rodimus Prime or Bluestreak vs Silverstreak). I would find it a lot more disturbing to see "Also known as Billy" in Blaster's intro. Oh, and I agree with Speng's new version of the listing. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] ([[User talk:Khajidha|talk]]) 12:57, 14 July 2016 (EDT)
:::Okay, but then, what else could we call it?  How else could we catalog that info?  Should we put the Omni names at the top of the article alongside the "Sometimes he is known as..." notation at the bottom of the intro?  I dunno if anybody would like that.  I get what you're saying about having "English" under Foreign names when we default to English as a standard, but I'm not sure of a better way to catalog their Omni names aside from how we have it (English with Omni in parenthesis) (EDIT: Ah, Khajida beat me to the punch by 2 minutes). --[[User:DrSpengler|DrSpengler]] ([[User talk:DrSpengler|talk]]) 12:59, 14 July 2016 (EDT)
::::I mean, I suppose just listing "Omni Productions Dub" without the word English next to it would read better? Or listing it's country of origin instead of language, rendering the meaning on "Foreign" as "non-American" rather than "non-English?" --[[User:KilMichaelMcC|KilMichaelMcC]] ([[User talk:KilMichaelMcC|talk]]) 13:05, 14 July 2016 (EDT)
:::::The Omni dubs are a very strange situation, though, and probably not something we need to build a whole policy around. Surely if we have a working system in place that reads a little strange in this one case we don't need to revamp everything. We can make some kind of reasonable exception just for Omni and call it a day.--[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 13:39, 14 July 2016 (EDT)
::::::Right. I think we're digressing from Kil's original complaint. [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 15:38, 14 July 2016 (EDT)
== Striking Unit:E from the record ==
As someone who has been adding a bunch of pages for the newly introduced Hasbro properties that are part of IDW's Revolution, I think we're hitting a bit of a snag: Unit:E.
Unit:E was supposed to spin-out of Prime, which would put it in the Aligned continuity, while all the Revolution stuff is based in G1 continuity. As such, including info on both IDW Action Man and Unit:E Action Man on the same page doesn't make sense (especially when that page was built solely with IDW in mind.) However, this is a Transformers Wiki, and I don't think we need Action Man (IDW) and Action Man (Unit:E)
This kind of thing WILL spiral out of control, and will only get worse with things like G.I. Joe characters (who are all G1 based) and Micronauts (because Acroyear is so different between the two incarnations.)
As such, I propose that we set a precedent to excise ANY Unit:E-based material, with the exception of how it directly relates to the Transformers. Meaning the page on the actual group mentioned in Prime and the comic itself would stay, but unless Transformers were involved, the events aren't referenced. [[User:DannyBoy|DannyBoy]] ([[User talk:DannyBoy|talk]]) 19:57 15 July 2016 (EST)
:Or we could just leave them on the same pages like we already are now. Don't overcomplicate things. [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 20:27, 15 July 2016 (EDT)
::The way we handle non-Transformers original characters is to keep all appearances together on the same page. So, if Destro shows up in Animated, and again in G1, we don't make two articles. No need for an Action Man (Aligned) and an Action Man (G1) under this scheme. Having them on the same page is a simple and elegant solution. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 20:39, 15 July 2016 (EDT)
:::My issue with Unit:E is that none of the characters actually interact, and the multiversal nature of the story means that the Action Man featured there may not even have Transformers in his own universe, meaning his adventures would fall into the Megaverse, and thus outside this wiki's domain. The Unit:E information is therefore superfluous. Unit:E is also not a Transformers-branded piece of media. Notice we don't record the G.I. Joe events of Infestation. --[[User:DannyBoy|DannyBoy]] ([[User talk:DannyBoy|talk]]) 20:53 15 July 2015 (EST)
::::Because those issues do not have Transformers in them. Unit:E does, and I'm seriously having a hard time seeing the harm in detailing an one-shot issue that didn't amount to anything and that nobody else will cover. [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 22:57, 15 July 2016 (EDT)
:::::The Unit:E stuff is G1 already though. Arcee, Jazz, Optimus Prime and Bumblebee are all seen as distinctly G1 incarnations of those characters. There isn't even a need to consider the fact that one spin-off is G1 and another is Aligned since that's not the case. --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 00:40, 16 July 2016 (EDT)
== Aligned characters ==
[http://www.allspark.com/forums/topic/101932-tfwikinet-thread-30/page-247 As brought up here on the Allspark], is there any momentum to split the RiD2015 incarnations of characters such as [[Grimlock (WFC)]], [[Sideswipe (WFC)]], and [[Kickback (FOC)]]? A highly broken concept as it is, the Aligned continuity family does roughly fit together as one timeline. As the three aforementioned RiD characters quite obviously do not share the looks and personalities of the WfC/FoC characters, I, for one, do not see how to reconcile them as the WfC/FoC characters at a new stage of their lives. [[User:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47]] ([[User talk:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|talk]]) 01:57, 4 August 2016 (EDT)
:Yeah, I've come around to the idea that they just don't have that much in common between names and altmodes (or, er, robot modes). I vote to split. --[[User:Riptide|Riptide]] ([[User talk:Riptide|talk]]) 04:52, 4 August 2016 (EDT)
::For the reasons I've laid out on the AllSpark and on Sideswipe (WFC)'s talk page, I also think they should be split. --[[User:Xaaron|Xaaron]] ([[User talk:Xaaron|talk]]) 07:24, 4 August 2016 (EDT)
:::I also vote split. And just because I think this is a really useful way to conceptualize things, I want to repeat my formulation from the AllSpark thread:
::::''Let me present this little thought experiment. Let's say that the RID 15 guy was named "Trapjaw", an early name for Grimlock. Maybe for copyright reasons, maybe for creative reasons, we don't know specifically. Would we still be inclined to keep the pages merged? This is an issue that has been a part of the Transformers brand since 1984 (see: Jetfire and Skyfire, who do indeed share a page). Shockblasts comfortably share pages with Shockwaves, Silverstreaks with Bluestreaks, Jazzs with Meisters. Likewise, characters since G1 have shared names and yet not been the same characters: Sky High is the earliest example. In this case, take away the name, and is there any reason to keep them merged? If your answer to this question is no, then you should probably be in favor of a split. ''
:::I think this is an abstract enough test to be useful in a variety of cases where there is name reuse but little else. I've tested it against various counterexamples and (BW vs G1 Megatron, Octane and Tankor, various Unicron Trilogy Mini-Con nameslaps, toon vs comic Blaster) and it always seems to produce the 'correct' answer. --[[User:Jimsorenson|Jimsorenson]] ([[User talk:Jimsorenson|talk]]) 09:52, 4 August 2016 (EDT)
::::This test is a fantastic measure and one I wholly advocate, but I'll note that this metric places ROTF and AOE Lockdown's merger on relatively shaky footing. Whether that's a good or bad thing is uncertain, but I'd say it's worth it to make sure these RID articles are split. [[User:Sky Shadow|Sky Shadow]] ([[User talk:Sky Shadow|talk]]) 08:29, 6 August 2016 (EDT)
[http://www.allspark.com/forums/topic/101932-tfwikinet-thread-30/?p=3302429 Spectre makes a good point here] about the distinctiveness of Grimlock and Sideswipe. [[User:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47]] ([[User talk:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|talk]]) 21:26, 4 August 2016 (EDT)
So...absent any complaints or counter-arguments in the next 24 hours, I say we go ahead and begin splitting these three characters. --[[User:Xaaron|Xaaron]] ([[User talk:Xaaron|talk]]) 10:38, 5 August 2016 (EDT)
:As much as my vote matters, I agree with splitting them. [[User:Stealthyboy|Stealthyboy]] ([[User talk:Stealthyboy|talk]]) 13:04, 5 August 2016 (EDT)
So far what I'm getting from the Allspark thread is that it's highly subjective whether anyone thinks FOC Grimlock and RID Grimlock should share a page because they're both based on G1 Grimlock, or whether the differences between the two characters are enough that they should get separate pages. --[[User:Abates|abates]] ([[User talk:Abates|talk]]) 19:37, 5 August 2016 (EDT)
: Really? I got the sense that there was one guy that really thought they should be together, several people that really thought they should be separate, and a few people who seemed on the fence. --[[User:Jimsorenson|Jimsorenson]] ([[User talk:Jimsorenson|talk]]) 23:19, 5 August 2016 (EDT)
:: '''Keep''' them merged. Any argument for splitting them is either arbitrary and could be applied to numerous other characters ([[Brawl (Movie)]], [[Vortex (Movie)]], [[Sideswipe (Movie)]], [[Swerve (Movie)]], [[Hound (Movie)]] and [[Lockdown (ROTF)]], to name a few), or based on [[authorial intent]].--[[User:Nevermore|Nevermore]] ([[User talk:Nevermore|talk]]) 09:02, 6 August 2016 (EDT)
::: None of those guys have the same problem of irreconcilable fiction and lots of it, and none of them right now have new material coming up on a regular basis. (The only big issue there is Brawl because Titan went "oh uh it's twins" and in practice that's been easy to skim over) --[[User:Charles RB|Charles RB]] ([[User talk:Charles RB|talk]]) 14:52, 6 August 2016 (GMT)
::::Yeah, if we'd got any significant fiction for Movie 1 Hound or ROTF Lockdown, I'd argue that they should be split. Hell, I'm still not convinced that the Lockdowns should share a page, but I'm flexible on that. Most of the ones you've brought up, I would think should share a page only because they ''both'' are based on the same vague concept ''and'' don't have large amounts of fiction in contradictory incarnations. --[[User:Riptide|Riptide]] ([[User talk:Riptide|talk]]) 11:49, 6 August 2016 (EDT)
:::::I would be up for splitting Brawl, Vortex, Sideswipe, etc though I think it would be unnecessary give how little material their non-screen versions received. But we already have [[Jetfire (Movie)]] and [[Jetfire (ROTF)]] split despite the former having no fiction whatsoever. [[User:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47]] ([[User talk:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|talk]]) 12:49, 6 August 2016 (EDT)
::::::I think, fundamentally, what it comes down to me is: ''will splitting help casual fans to understand better/stop them being confused?'' In the case of RID Grimlock, Sideswipe, and probably Kickback, I think that yes, it would. With Movie Hound and Sideswipe and Vortex, there's very little understanding that would be improved by doing so, and would likely just confuse fans searching for "movie Hound", etc. In the case of the Lockdowns, they're arguably the same character by virtue of Q-Transformers, though that's obviously kinda shaky.  (And splitting Brawl would be the most unnecessary pedantry in the whole world, damn.) --[[User:Riptide|Riptide]] ([[User talk:Riptide|talk]]) 15:14, 6 August 2016 (EDT)
:: I'd vote to keep them merged, with the stipulation that we add a note of some kind explaining the discrepancy. [[User:Grum|Grum]] ([[User talk:Grum|talk]]) 09:02, 6 August 2016 (EDT)
::Split. They're wildly different characters with no visual similarity and aren't based on the same toy (WFC Grimlock not even originally from a toy!) and it means anyone browsing to look up RID Grimlock, the one they most likely will be, atm has to get through a lot of different Grimlock. --[[User:Charles RB|Charles RB]] ([[User talk:Charles RB|talk]]) 14:46, 6 August 2016 (GMT)
A lot of what I'm hearing from the "Keep them merged" crowd is that they don't think some of the reasons for splitting are good reasons. Let me flip it around for a minute -- can anyone think of a ''benefit'' to keeping these characters merged? Besides a slippery-slope argument that it may, someday in the future, be used to justify other splits? --[[User:Xaaron|Xaaron]] ([[User talk:Xaaron|talk]]) 10:03, 6 August 2016 (EDT)
Split. They're very different characters. And there's no conflict between Hasbro statements and author intent here; the most relevant Hasbro statement is the one that would indicate that FoC and RiD do take place in the same timeline, in which case there can be no "different interpretation of the same characters" between them; characters who cannot be the actual same individual at different times in the same timeline therefore must be different ones with the same name. [[User:NovaSaber|NovaSaber]] ([[User talk:NovaSaber|talk]]) 15:02, 6 August 2016 (EDT)
Can I vote that there should be no blanket policy here, to just evaluate on a case-by-case basis?  --[[User:KilMichaelMcC|KilMichaelMcC]] ([[User talk:KilMichaelMcC|talk]]) 16:33, 6 August 2016 (EDT)
: Absolutely, and seconded. --[[User:Xaaron|Xaaron]] ([[User talk:Xaaron|talk]]) 16:45, 6 August 2016 (EDT)
So I count '''Split: 10''' (Xaaron, SHIELD Agent 47, Charles RB, Jim S, Riptide, Sky Shadow, Stealthyboy, NovaSaber, abates, Sabrblade), '''Keep: 2''' (Nevermore, Grum), with no guiding hand from Admin/Owners. Can we go ahead with splitting these three characters, with the understanding that no larger administrative policy is being established, and future cases should still be evaluated on an individual basis? --[[User:Xaaron|Xaaron]] ([[User talk:Xaaron|talk]]) 10:42, 7 August 2016 (EDT)
:I mentioned it on the Allspark, but I don't have any particularly strong preference so long it's applied consistently for all the applicable Aligned characters, and not just Grimlock. I do kind of question the sense in still treating Aligned like it's still a single timeline under Squint Test rules, since it seems reasonably certain, between RID Grimlock's existence and the departure of Hasbro folks like Archer, that that concept has been thrown out the window. But I also feel like splitting these characters has benefits in terms of accessibility for the casual user, and I guess that's why I'm not going to vote against – I think I probably would if it felt entirely like meaningless "furniture rearrangement" (as Sipher puts it). I think it's worth putting out one final call for people to 'vote' on the Allspark thread before going ahead with the split. [[User:Jalaguy|Jalaguy]] ([[User talk:Jalaguy|talk]]) 11:19, 7 August 2016 (EDT)
::Also, as a postscript: if the splits do go ahead, links will need updating pretty hasty-like, or else there'll be a hell of a lot of potential for confusion. [[User:Jalaguy|Jalaguy]] ([[User talk:Jalaguy|talk]]) 11:26, 7 August 2016 (EDT)
:::Relinked episodes 1-12 and the main RID series page so far. Moving on to the non-show relinks now. --[[User:Charles RB|Charles RB]] ([[User talk:Charles RB|talk]]) 02:00, 8 August 2016 (GMT)
::::Every image and linked-to non-TV-story on Grim's page has been relinked, plus the RID toyline page. Just the rest of the eps and other character's pages to go--[[User:Charles RB|Charles RB]] ([[User talk:Charles RB|talk]]) 02:30, 8 August 2016 (GMT)
:::::Eps and main Autobots relinked--[[User:Charles RB|Charles RB]] ([[User talk:Charles RB|talk]]) 02:50, 8 August 2016 (GMT)
::::::I think I've got all of the remaining articles, so there's just a pile of images with links to the wrong Grimlock in their descriptions. --[[User:Abates|abates]] ([[User talk:Abates|talk]]) 07:11, 8 August 2016 (EDT)
:Throwing my vote in while I still can. I said it on The Allspark an will say it here that I'm in favor of splitting the Grimlock, Sideswipe, and Kickback articles. Although... [[Blurr (Prime)]] might be a fourth contender for splitting as well, but I'm not as eager to see that one split as the other three, so I won't fight for that one as much if enough people object to splitting the Blurr page. --[[User:Sabrblade|Sabrblade]] ([[User talk:Sabrblade|talk]]) 14:27, 7 August 2016 (EDT)
::Hrm. Yeah, I'd say split the Blurrs, too. They've really only got "car what goes fast" in common, and really, what ''else'' is a bot called Blurr going to turn into? With that one in particular, they're so different that there's no way to reconcile them for an opening paragraph other than the faux-narrative of "first he was this, then he was this". --[[User:Riptide|Riptide]] ([[User talk:Riptide|talk]]) 14:38, 7 August 2016 (EDT)
:I'm actually in favour of split. Not sure I'm particularly worried about Kickback, but Grimlock and Sideswipe definitely. --[[User:Abates|abates]] ([[User talk:Abates|talk]]) 18:34, 7 August 2016 (EDT)
Starting on Sideswipe now. Though, come to think of it, is it necessary to title ''Robots in Disguise'' Sideswipe at "Sideswipe (RID 2015)" since the 2001 guy has a space in his name? [[User:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47]] ([[User talk:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|talk]]) 11:15, 8 August 2016 (EDT)
::No, strictly speaking it wouldn't need the 2015, though it's probably a case where an argument could be made for making an exception? [[User:Jalaguy|Jalaguy]] ([[User talk:Jalaguy|talk]]) 12:36, 8 August 2016 (EDT)
== Generations toyline page ==
A thought: do the ''Combiner Wars'' and ''Titans Return'' sublines merit their own pages? The [[Transformers: Generations|''Generations'' page]] has exceeded the length of even the [[The Transformers (toyline)|U.S. G1 toyline page]], and barring some unforeseen financial disaster at Hasbro, we know that the Prime Wars Trilogy will get another entry after ''Titans Return''. [[User:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47]] ([[User talk:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|talk]]) 16:28, 14 August 2016 (EDT)
:I agree. Given how the "''Combiner Wars''" and "''Titans Return''" names overshadow the "''Generations''" name on the packaging, I think we should give them their own page. The fact that each also has a [[Combiner Wars (franchise)|franchise]] [[Titans Return (franchise)|page]] I think warrants this expansion. --[[User:DannyBoy|DannyBoy]] ([[User talk:DannyBoy|talk]]) 18:20, 14 August 2016 (EDT)
:I'm on board with that.--[[User:Nevermore|Nevermore]] ([[User talk:Nevermore|talk]]) 06:27, 15 August 2016 (EDT)
::Given that Combiner Wars, Titans Return and the next line are under the "Prime Wars" umbrella, maybe we should make a Prime Wars subpage for Generations, similar to the way certain character pages have a separate Toys page, and put the toys in those three lines on that page.[[User:Stealthyboy|Stealthyboy]] ([[User talk:Stealthyboy|talk]]) 17:10, 18 August 2016 (EDT)
Anyone in opposition to this motion? [[User:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47]] ([[User talk:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|talk]]) 00:09, 21 August 2016 (EDT)
:Splitting is probably the least unwieldy option, or will be eventually, so I don't see why not. [[User:Item42|Item42]] ([[User talk:Item42|talk]]) 00:32, 21 August 2016 (EDT)
I'd been considering this myself for a while. My suggestion, I guess, would be splitting it three ways, by logo/branding - original, FOC/T30, and Prime Wars. [[User:Jalaguy|Jalaguy]] ([[User talk:Jalaguy|talk]]) 04:45, 21 August 2016 (EDT)
:I think the original Deluxe line, FoC, and T30 can all stay on the same Generations page since their packaging has "Transformers: Generations" as the main thing. I'd even argue splitting up Combiner Wars and Titans Return into their own pages given that (as far as I know) Prime Wars wasn't mentioned on their toy packaging. --[[User:DannyBoy|DannyBoy]] ([[User talk:DannyBoy|talk]]) 11:55, 21 August 2016 (EDT)
::Of course the argument "size of the logo on the packaging" opens a whole can of worms again regarding ''[[Reveal the Shield]]'', which we currently consider a [[subline imprint]] of [[Transformers (2010 toyline)|''Transformers'' (2010)]]… Long story short, the title "Reveal the Shield" on the packaging has the same size and font and all as the concurrently available original ''[[Transformers: Generations|Generations]]'' Deluxe line's title (seriouly, just judging from the packaging alone, [http://imgur.com/a/Mhhjr how is the right one a toy line and the left one only a subline imprint]?)… on the other hand, all the ''Reveal the Shield'' assortments were continued from the 2010 ''Transformers'' line's general retail assortments ([http://imgur.com/B2YWKYd same assortment numbers]), which were simpy branded ''Transformers'' with additional stickers for the ''[[Hunt for the Decepticons]]'' promotion and Jesus Christ on a bicycle 2010's branding was confusing as hell.--[[User:Nevermore|Nevermore]] ([[User talk:Nevermore|talk]]) 15:34, 22 August 2016 (EDT)
:::''Combiner Wars'' and ''Titans Return'', though, are subline imprints with noteworthy fiction due to their status as multimedia branding. If and when I get to separating out the toylines into their own articles, I believe I will focus on those two. [[User:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47]] ([[User talk:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|talk]]) 23:40, 25 August 2016 (EDT)
== Masterforce humans and transtectors ==
Um, why are we separating the human Minerva, Ginrai, etc. from the robot Minerva, Ginrai, etc? Especially considering that we just fairly recently combined the organic Nebulan Peacemaker (et al.) and the robotic Peaceman (et al.). --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] ([[User talk:Khajidha|talk]]) 12:39, 30 August 2016 (EDT)
:Well, it's not really a comparable situation to Peacemaker and co. - this is robot and human versions of the same character co-existing together in the same world, not a character being variably robot or human in different universes. With new fiction (and probably more to come) of the humans and robots off doing separate stuff, splitting them out is probably the solution that leads to the least-confusing biography write-ups... [[User:Jalaguy|Jalaguy]] ([[User talk:Jalaguy|talk]]) 12:46, 30 August 2016 (EDT)
::We already did this almost two years ago for [[Shūta Gō]] and [[Goshooter]] when they appeared simultaneously in order to keep track of them better. [[User:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47]] ([[User talk:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|talk]]) 12:49, 30 August 2016 (EDT)
:::What Jalaguy said. Otherwise we get alternating paragraphs of human and robot Minerva fiction which only confuse readers. [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 16:16, 30 August 2016 (EDT)
::::Should their toys be split onto subpages as well then? It seems redundant to have exactly the same section on both pages.[[User:Omegatron|Omegatron]] ([[User talk:Omegatron|talk]]) 17:10, 30 August 2016 (EDT)
:::::They're not that long and they don't have the exact same set of toys. [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 17:14, 30 August 2016 (EDT)
==Bios by Universal Stream==
For characters like Jhiaxus who have totally different personalities, I think we should have individual bios placed above their fiction. Though we do note that certain characters have wildly different portrayals, we never really explain their personality, simply listing what happens in their fictional appearances. This could also count for locations as well. For example, Cybertron is a very different planet in several continuities, yet we don't usually have individual descriptions of each version. Currently we (for the most part) only list the history of the planet, not its defining physical characteristics. I'm not talking about a long bio, just a few sentences to clarify the differences with its other versions. Does anyone else agree? --[[User:Halfshell25|Halfshell25]] 12:31, 04 September 2016 (EDT)
== Titan Master toy info accessibility ==
To account for ''Titans Return'' Titan Masters whose names and personalities match the large classic dudes instead of the small classic dudes they tend to physically resemble, I have added links in the 1980s Nebulans' toy sections pointing to the large guy's ''Titans Return'' toys. How does everyone feel about this? [[User:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47]] ([[User talk:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|talk]]) 22:23, 8 September 2016 (EDT)
:Sounds good to me. I was going to put the full entries on their pages, but this probably works better. --[[User:Riptide|Riptide]] ([[User talk:Riptide|talk]]) 06:57, 9 September 2016 (EDT)
::Personalities? I am intrigued. How do you know what their personalities are? There are no bios or anything. - [[User:Gimmick|Gimmick]] ([[User talk:Gimmick|talk]]) 18:18, 9 September 2016 (EDT)
:::Haven't you seen the packaging backsides? Or the [[Titans Return: The Power of the Titan Masters|available on the Internet catalog]]? [[User:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47]] ([[User talk:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|talk]]) 19:25, 9 September 2016 (EDT)
::::I know about the catalog bios, but the single-packed Titan Masters really don't have bios anywhere on their package. [[User:NovaSaber|NovaSaber]] ([[User talk:NovaSaber|talk]]) 20:28, 9 September 2016 (EDT)
:::::Yeah, the single-packed TMs don't have their bios on their packaging, just in the storybook/catalogue and on their Hasbro.com listings. [[User:Jalaguy|Jalaguy]] ([[User talk:Jalaguy|talk]]) 08:02, 10 September 2016 (EDT)
::::::I haven't read the Comic-Con storybook, but thanks for the heads up on the Hasbro.com bios. The Wiki could probably say more about that. Although I think I would rather not have known that some Titan Masters have their big-guy personality just because in the real life universe, their toy was packaged individually. Personal canon: Titan Master Fangry's superpower is that he comes with Google Maps preinstalled. - [[User:Gimmick|Gimmick]] ([[User talk:Gimmick|talk]]) 10:49, 10 September 2016 (EDT)
:Should the same system be used for [[Emissary (Generations)|Emissary]] on [[Spike_Witwicky_(G1)|Spike]] and [[Galen Kord|Galen's]] pages? At the moment the full entry for Emissary is on Spike's page with nothing on Galen's, even though the G1 toy is on both. [[User:Omegatron|Omegatron]] ([[User talk:Omegatron|talk]]) 07:06, 10 September 2016 (EDT)
::Emissary is designed to look like Spike and Galen's armor, though. That's more in common than there is between the single Titan Masters and their corresponding Nebulans, who basically have "turns into the same head" as the only reason to associate them. [[User:NovaSaber|NovaSaber]] ([[User talk:NovaSaber|talk]]) 14:59, 10 September 2016 (EDT)
:::I suppose, but there are a lot of toys that look very similar to a previous character but aren't on their page. [[User:Omegatron|Omegatron]] ([[User talk:Omegatron|talk]]) 11:34, 12 September 2016 (EDT)
== Add links to uploaded videos of episodes in the articles for episodes? ==
I have been watching the G1 on dailymotion and all thanks to this wiki, I just check the list of episodes and look for it in a couple of chosen favorite channels.
I thought that maybe it'd be cool if we could simply add links to the episodes in the articles themselves?
As a bonus, we could also form a team and:
* Set up our own channel.
* Collect the best quality versions of the episodes from various sources.
* Link to those videos in the articles. --[[User:Furhun|Furhun]] ([[User talk:Furhun|talk]]) 03:20, 14 September 2016 (EDT)
:Nope. The wiki is ''not'' going to endorse piracy. [[User:Jalaguy|Jalaguy]] ([[User talk:Jalaguy|talk]]) 03:28, 14 September 2016 (EDT)
::That would give Hasbro a nice, easy reason to shut the wiki down, which is not what we're after. When it's all out for purchase, it's not fair to them to put it up illegally. [[User:AkibaSilver|AkibaSilver]] ([[User talk:AkibaSilver|talk]]) 08:31, 15 September 2016 (EDT)
:Christ no. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 15:25, 15 September 2016 (EDT)
== Animation/continuity errors ==
Hey, this is just a little thing - I'm not proposing anything, just mentioning this with a view to moving forward, but I really dislike how on episode pages we put errors first. I get why, it's a carryover from our G1 episode pages being some of the first things we ever did, and errors being perhaps the most famous, most catalogue-able thing about that series. But it's an out-of-place, and frankly I think demeaning, thing to have as the first entry for an average modern cartoon episode when there's plenty of other, more "relevant" information to provide ahead of mistakes. We don't do it for comics, and I don't like it on episodes either. - [[User:Chris McFeely|Chris McFeely]] ([[User talk:Chris McFeely|talk]]) 14:06, 15 September 2016 (EDT)
:I'd say go ahead and make a proposal to change it. You have my vote behind you. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] ([[User talk:Khajidha|talk]]) 14:49, 15 September 2016 (EDT)
:I'm beyond okay with this and absolutely in favor of making this a broad-scale change to existing pages. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 15:13, 15 September 2016 (EDT)
:Yup, also very much behind this. [[User:Jalaguy|Jalaguy]] ([[User talk:Jalaguy|talk]]) 15:21, 15 September 2016 (EDT)
:If we're re-ordering anyway, does anyone else think it would be more informative to "continuity errors" always follow "continuity notes" for episodes that have both, even if it means "continuity errors" is no longer consecutive with "animation and technical errors"? [[User:NovaSaber|NovaSaber]] ([[User talk:NovaSaber|talk]]) 15:51, 15 September 2016 (EDT)
::I wouldn't be adverse to making the errors a subset of notes, really. I mean, a continuity error IS technically a note about continuity. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 16:05, 15 September 2016 (EDT)
:::I'm not sure, with modern shows, that we even ''need'' separate sections for "continuity errors" and "animation errors." Again, with G1 - yes, we did, because there were so many. But such things are so rare now that a simple "Errors" section seems like all we need to everything effectively.
::::Ehn, I feel like keeping all the continuity bits together, be they complimentary or clashing, makes more sense than lumping the continuity-clashes with "someone forgot to texture that panel in that one shot". --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 16:15, 15 September 2016 (EDT)
::I agree. Although, personally, I don't see a reason to bundle it up under one "Errors" heading. As a reader, I would like them to be under relevant headings. --[[User:Furhun|Furhun]] ([[User talk:Furhun|talk]]) 14:29, 18 September 2016 (EDT)
== Japanese UT character disambig tags ==
Would anyone object to me simplifying the tags "(Micron Densetsu)", "(Super Link)", and "(Galaxy Force)" for Japanese-original Unicron Trilogy characters with such tags down to just "(MD)", "(SL)", and "(GF)"? [[User:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47]] ([[User talk:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|talk]]) 00:48, 20 September 2016 (EDT)
:Go for it! --[[User:Sabrblade|Sabrblade]] ([[User talk:Sabrblade|talk]]) 01:09, 20 September 2016 (EDT)
== RID/G1 character merges ==
What with the steadily increasing numbers of RID 2001 characters imported into Generation 1 based continuities with basically no differences, I feel like we should probably just merge their G1 counterparts into the RID pages and be done with it, especially with the blurred lines of Car Robots involved; we're already doing so for Wind Sheer and Skyfire. This would (probably) mean merging the following pages:
* Bruticus (CR) into [[Bruticus (RID)]]
* [[Cryotek (Universe)]] into [[Cryotek (RID)]]
* Dark Scream (G1) into [[Dark Scream]]
* Emissary (BW) into [[Emissary (RID)]]
* Gigatron (G1) into [[Megatron (RID)]]
* [[Jhiaxus (RID)]] into [[Jhiaxus (G2)]]
* Side Burn (G1) into [[Side Burn (RID)]] (arguable)
* Sky-Byte (G2) into [[Sky-Byte (RID)]]
* Slapper (Universe) into [[Slapper (RID)]]
* And probably [[Predacon (RID)]] into [[Predacon (BW)]] as well; the latter kind of needs a more continuity-neutral reformat anyway.
I just feel like all these fairly arbitrary splits for guys who are intended to be ''pretty much'' the same characters, coupled with the explanatory blocks of text about Japanese G1 continuity, is making this more complicated than it needs to be. Thoughs? --[[User:Riptide|Riptide]] ([[User talk:Riptide|talk]]) 11:54, 21 September 2016 (EDT)
:Yup. About time too. --[[User:Jimsorenson|Jimsorenson]] ([[User talk:Jimsorenson|talk]]) 12:04, 21 September 2016 (EDT)
:I'm down. - [[User:Chris McFeely|Chris McFeely]] ([[User talk:Chris McFeely|talk]]) 12:11, 21 September 2016 (EDT)
:[[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Archive60#Probably an unpopular thought, but...|Always been for it.]] I'm not sure if I'm on board with Hasbro-original characters like Jhiaxus and Cryotek, but I'll accept them if it means the CR guys get merged. [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 12:21, 21 September 2016 (EDT)
:Oppose. RID is not only a separate continuity, but also a separate multiversal stream. To start merging these characters just because they're broadly similar doesn't really make sense. After all, ''Animated'' [[Ransack (Animated)|Ransack]] and [[Crumplezone (Animated)|Crumplezone]] are practically identical in personality and design to their ''Cybertron'' counterparts, but we acknowledge them as separate distinct entities. And characters imported into G1 like Sky-Byte have shown up in three different continuities. Would this also mean ''Universe'' [[Ratchet (Universe)|Ratchet]] gets folded in with G1 [[Ratchet (G1)|Ratchet]]? Plus, this could lead to confusion by someone wondering "Why isn't all the info about Fire Truck Optimus with Old Optimus?" I think by this point we're long past merging RID and G1 in any form other than the brief "in Japan, this cartoon is G1 because dumb reasons." --[[User:DannyBoy|DannyBoy]] ([[User talk:DannyBoy|talk]]) 12:47, 21 September 2016 (EDT)
::The difference between G1 and RID is inherently different to the difference between G1 and Animated because of Car Robots. People wouldn't wonder why RID Optimus wasn't with G1 Optimus because they have distinct designs and personalities, and have existed in the same continuity. We already have different incarnations of the same character from separate continuity families sharing pages, so it's not like this is going to start a slippery slope. (And no, Universe and G1 Ratchet would not be merged, for the same reason that RID and G1 Prowl would not be merged.) --[[User:Riptide|Riptide]] ([[User talk:Riptide|talk]]) 13:02, 21 September 2016 (EDT)
:::The only slippery slope involved here is the one we're already sliding down that involves more and more RID characters appearing in G1 stories that makes this a more plausible action to take. - [[User:Chris McFeely|Chris McFeely]] ([[User talk:Chris McFeely|talk]]) 13:06, 21 September 2016 (EDT)
:::Except this wiki has always used the American-based fiction as it's primary source, where RID is separate from everything. And even Car Robots being G1 is the result of a freaking RETCON. I'd even argue that any characters who do have multiple continuities on their page be split (though the only examples that come to mind are former Multiversal Singularities like Unicron or Vector Prime, which were only created that way ''because'' they were multiversal singularities.)
:::Also, If I end up getting out voted on this, I'd at least like to argue against merging Side Burn, Jhiaxus, and GIgatron/Megatron. Because G1 Side Burn does differ from RID in a few notable ways (most notably NOT being brother to a guy named Prowl), Jhiaxus is more of a repurposing, and not only is there already a Megatron in the IDW comics, there's a Gigatron in the Animated universe that is also based on RID Megs. And if we're merging BW Bruticus into RID Bruticus, we'd also have to merge TF 2010 Backstop, Underbite, and Wreckloose in with their Cybertron counterparts. All in all, this seems like it's becoming more of a headache than just keeping them separate.--[[User:DannyBoy|DannyBoy]] ([[User talk:DannyBoy|talk]]) 14:41, 21 September 2016 (EDT)
::::This is kind of a weird string of complaints that don't really logically bear on anything. [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 15:17, 21 September 2016 (EDT)
:I'd be fine with this. Certainly seems preferable to weird crap like Sky-Byte having Japanese G1 fiction on one article and Hasbro G1 fiction on another. [[User:Jalaguy|Jalaguy]] ([[User talk:Jalaguy|talk]])
:I agree with the general idea and most of the examples, but I'd say Jhiaxus isn't really the same situation as the rest. I'm not sure about the factions either. [[User:NovaSaber|NovaSaber]] ([[User talk:NovaSaber|talk]]) 14:45, 21 September 2016 (EDT)
Some other stuff that could stand to be merged:
*Hound (RID) into [[Hound (G1)]]
*Sky Lynx (RID) into [[Sky Lynx (G1)]]
*Teletraan I (RID) into Teletraan I (G1)
Mmmmmmaybe [[Alpha Trion (RID)]]? [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 13:38, 21 September 2016 (EDT)
:Three "CHRIST YES"es, and a "hmnnn." - [[User:Chris McFeely|Chris McFeely]] ([[User talk:Chris McFeely|talk]]) 13:41, 21 September 2016 (EDT)
:For what it's worth, [[Ultra Trion]]'s "Trion" bits do sure look like they came off of G1 A3... --[[User:Riptide|Riptide]] ([[User talk:Riptide|talk]]) 14:15, 21 September 2016 (EDT)
How do we feel about the likes of [[Ransack (IDW)|Ransack]]? Could he stand to be merged into his ''Cybertron'' page? --[[User:Emvee|Emvee]] ([[User talk:Emvee|talk]]) 15:22, 21 September 2016 (EDT)
:Eh, hang on I think I'm caught up now. Without ''Car Robots'' there's no link to G1 so he's a separate character unlike the RID guys. Is that right? --[[User:Emvee|Emvee]] ([[User talk:Emvee|talk]]) 15:27, 21 September 2016 (EDT)
::Yeah, that's a separate discussion (and a merge I'd disagree with, but let's focus on the RID guys for now). [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 15:35, 21 September 2016 (EDT)
:::I agree that they should be merged except Jhiaxus.--[[User:Primestar3|Primestar3]] ([[User talk:Primestar3|talk]]) 15:38, 21 September 2016 (EDT)
:I think I'd be against merging anyone from different continuity families other than between G1/BW and RiD. [[User:NovaSaber|NovaSaber]] ([[User talk:NovaSaber|talk]]) 15:55, 21 September 2016 (EDT)
::That seems to be a reasonable rule of thumb. --[[User:Emvee|Emvee]] ([[User talk:Emvee|talk]]) 16:09, 21 September 2016 (EDT)
::To be honest, I'd be kind of inclined to merge the BWU Micromaster/Mini-Con repurposings as well, just because both iterations of the characters are so insignificant, and AVP seemed to make a point of having a lot of Mini-Cons exist across continuity families... but that's a separate argument and one with no real solid logic behind it. In this particular instance, yes, leave it as G1 and RID. --[[User:Riptide|Riptide]] ([[User talk:Riptide|talk]]) 16:16, 21 September 2016 (EDT)
I'm not sure exactly what position to take, but I would say that Hasbro-original characters are somewhat different from the guys who share a CR/RiD cartoon narrative. Thus, I think RiD Alpha Trion should be looked at the same way as RiD Optimus Prime and RiD Ultra Magnus. And to add to the list of pages up for consideration:
*Plasma into [[Cerebros (RID)]]
Also, I note that the one-off text mention of IDW G1 Side Burn. Anyone know if that iteration is tied to RiD 2001 Side Burn or is an independent conception? [[User:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47]] ([[User talk:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|talk]]) 16:32, 21 September 2016 (EDT)
So should we merge Cryotek and Jhiaxus? I opposed it back when because there was no real reason to while we had the others split, but now I think that it's a close enough situation that they should be merged, even if they don't have Car Robots equivalents; it's still "RID guy is used in a G1 universe". (Plus, Bruticus only has a "Car Robots" counterpart because of AVP fiction, so merging him solely on that basis while leaving the other Hasbro-originals separate feels overly nitpicky.) --[[User:Riptide|Riptide]] ([[User talk:Riptide|talk]]) 09:02, 22 September 2016 (EDT)
:I feel like Jhiaxus is more "RID Optimus Prime and G1 Optimus Prime"—he would have had his article all along if it wasn't for 3H saying it was the original Jhiaxus. I admit I don't have an argument for Cryotek. Just preference. If you want to merge them, *shrug* [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 09:16, 22 September 2016 (EDT)
::I think they should remain separate. RiD Cryotek and Jhiaxus had independent Viron existences in the first place due to their toys, and I think their personalities are distinct. That their toys were repurposed is like ''Prime'' Ratchet's design getting repurposed in G1 for that X-Files Hearts of Steel story. [[User:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47]] ([[User talk:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|talk]]) 10:33, 22 September 2016 (EDT)
:::I think, at least in the case of Jhiaxus, "distinct personality" doesn't matter that much, because he's never been consistent. Really, I just think it's neater to have them together if the other RID characters are, especially since they both predate recent official repurposing trends; 3H's thinking was probably "Cryotek is Cryotek"/"Jhiaxus is Jhiaxus". --[[User:Riptide|Riptide]] ([[User talk:Riptide|talk]]) 10:39, 22 September 2016 (EDT)
Wait, better argument: we're already keeping the Hasbro-original, toyline-only characters Skyfire and Wind Sheer merged across continuity families, and it'd be patently silly to split them out. I don't want to argue for consistency above all things, but in this matter, I think it'd be a good idea. --[[User:Riptide|Riptide]] ([[User talk:Riptide|talk]]) 12:42, 22 September 2016 (EDT)
:Okay, I do not necessarily agree, but I can see a case to be made that similarly to Wind Sheer and Skyfire, Cryotek is a Hasbro RiD-original guy who was extended into G1. But that does not apply to Jhiaxus. G2 Jhiaxus existed by himself for a decade before the independent RiD toy came along. RiD Jhiaxus by our policies and by logic should remain an independent page. Otherwise, we should merge ''Prime'' Ratchet into G1 Ratchet's page. [[User:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47]] ([[User talk:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|talk]]) 04:20, 23 September 2016 (EDT)
::Really? Because his page only got built when I mentioned his name in Ask Vector Prime as a continuity patch as far as I know. That hardly seems like a cut-and-dried case. --[[User:Jimsorenson|Jimsorenson]] ([[User talk:Jimsorenson|talk]]) 07:41, 23 September 2016 (EDT)
:::Yeah, I think that the fact that for a decade and a half the ''only'' use of RID Jhiaxus was as the G2 character makes it more fair to fudge categorization for the sake of consistency. Plus, as I said, G2 Jhiaxus is already both "tyrannical leader" and "sycophantic scientist"; is "dedicated, loyal lieutenant" that much of a step away? (Hell, you could even look at it as a halfway point between the two...)
:I disagree. One of the things I like about this wiki, is the fact that every continuity get's its own share of articles. And RID and G1 are not even part of the same continuity family. I don't see why it's even being considered and agreed to. Also, they weren't just different families, but RID is a japanese cartoon.
:You say that there are virtually no differences, so I assume that they look identical to their G1 counterparts, but what about the story? Take hound for example. I haven't watched the cartoon so I don't know, but if he didn't get a redesign, does that mean that he wasn't relevant to the story either? If that is the case, then I guess it won't kill to merge. 
:And why would you want to merge the Predacon(BW) with Predacon(RID)? The BW Predacons came after the decepticons, and are rather like their descendants or successors, while in RID, the decepticons are like a really small sub-group of the Predacons. That alone, I believe shows that it makes no sense to merge the two. --[[User:Furhun|Furhun]] ([[User talk:Furhun|talk]]) 09:44, 24 September 2016 (EDT)
::Surely that's more of an argument for splitting the Decepticons, then? I think if the Autobots and Decepticons are broadly similar enough across continuities to have only one page for each, the same's true of the BW/RID Predacons. (The Prime Predacons have a different insignia, story role and altmodes, so they wouldn't be merged.) --[[User:Riptide|Riptide]] ([[User talk:Riptide|talk]]) 12:14, 24 September 2016 (EDT)
:::Let's compare the two, shall we?
:::Similarities:
:::* Both evil.
:::* Both led by a Megatron.
:::* Both transform into animals.
:::* Terrorize.
:::* Logo.
:::Differences:
:::* The RID Predacons have a long lasting enmity with Autobots while the BW Predacons have it with the Maximals.
:::* The BW Predacons were descended or derived from the Decepticons, while in RID, the Decepticons were a subgroup of the Predacons.
:::* Predacon Council vs Tripedacus Council
:::* The RID Predacons are rougly the same size as the Autobots while the average BW Predacons are smaller than Prime's head.
:::* Virtually no similarity at all between the story.
:::* Not a single common character. Megatron doesn't count (also he seems closer to the G1 Megatron than the Beast Megatron.)--[[User:Furhun|Furhun]] ([[User talk:Furhun|talk]]) 11:14, 2 October 2016 (EDT)
::::Why does the size matter? In some JG1 stories and in ''Wings'', Beast Era characters appear as the same size as G1 characters. And what does story matter? In IDW, Autobots and Decepticons are vastly more morally gray than in Sunbow, but they're both still Autobots and Decepticons. Also, versions of Sky-Byte, Dark Scream, and Slapper have appeared variably as RiD Predacons and Beast Era Predacons.
::Hound wasn't ''in'' the RiD cartoon; or toyline, for that matter. Some guy who looks like Hound just had a small role in a convention story whose continuity family wasn't even confirmed until Ask Vector Prime said it was a "Viron" universe. [[User:NovaSaber|NovaSaber]] ([[User talk:NovaSaber|talk]]) 12:06, 24 September 2016 (EDT)
== National Toy Hall of Fame nomination ==
The Transformers toyline is 1 of 12 nominees (2 or 3 will be inducted) to the [[wikipedia:National_Toy_Hall_of_Fame|National Toy Hall of Fame]], according to http://www.toyhalloffame.org/2016-finalists (which uses as an illustration the most prominent and sought-after of all Transformers, [[Topspin_(G1)#Generation_1|G1 Topspin]]).
On the http://www.toyhalloffame.org/ main page (which uses a [http://www.tfu.info/1986/Autobot/Metroplex/metroplex.htm G1 Metroplex] with broken/missing parts as an illustration) visitors can vote for their favorite nominee.


i feel like this is relevant to the wiki, but i'm not sure where to put it.  Possibly a new article for the National Toy Hall of Fame(Maybe also under Notes/Trivia in Topspin's and Metroplex's articles?)
== Binder of Revelation Illustration Credits ==
Okay, don't kill me here, I'm just hoping that the artists who contributed to the Binder fifteen-ish years ago get their proper due since it's out in the open now.  I got in touch with the art director of the Binder of Revelation and have a fairly complete list of credits for who did what illustration.  Since this isn't actually a published work, how do we go about giving proper illustration credits?  Do we even credit anyone?  Considering the document itself has no credits, I feel like it's worthwhile that the artists get recognized, even if we aren't putting any images up ourselves.  [[User:MCRG|MCRG]] ([[User talk:MCRG|talk]]) 21:37, 25 November 2025 (EST)
:I don't think this is objectionable info to note at the least. [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 23:03, 25 November 2025 (EST)
::For now, maybe put your raw info on a sandbox so we can get a better sense of it? Most of the Binder art I know of was by Ken Christiansen, for instance, so if all but a few pieces are by him, it would seem silly to list them all individually. But I'm guessing it's more varied than that. —[[User:The Wadapan|wadapan]] ([[User talk:The Wadapan|talk]]) 00:26, 26 November 2025 (EST)
:::It's a pretty wide spread, surprisingly.  A lot of the pieces are tag team works where Eric Siebenaler did roughs and other artists did the finals, but it's around 5-10 artists without me checking the exact notes at the momentI'll start getting that together.[[User:MCRG|MCRG]] ([[User talk:MCRG|talk]]) 14:41, 26 November 2025 (EST)
::::All known credits added.  On a side note, is it worth pointing out somewhere that the Binder itself is written in the style of a RPG manual instead of an actual franchise bibleIt goes a long way in explaining why it was so quickly disregarded by other creative teams when comparing it to bibles from other franchises or just other series bibles within Transformers on the whole, and the pricetag attached to the project.--[[User:MCRG|MCRG]] ([[User talk:MCRG|talk]]) 15:23, 21 January 2026 (EST)


--[[User:Rhymus|Rhymus]] ([[User talk:Rhymus|talk]]) 03:35, 26 September 2016 (EDT)
== What are we calling the new  "Core" Transformers stuff? ==
:I'm not sure about a page for the National Toy Hall of Fame (for comparison, we don't have pages for the museums that have G1 Grimlock or G1 Slag in their exhibits), but mentioning it on the pages of those two individuals sounds good. I would also recommend a mention on the [[Transformers brand]] page, as this concerns Transformers as a toy concept.--[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] ([[User talk:Khajidha|talk]]) 07:04, 26 September 2016 (EDT)


== Easter eggs and homages ==
So... what should we call the new generically branded "Transformers" toys that have been showing up? (Prime Changers, Smash Changers, Tiny Turbo Changers, maybe more in the future). Should it be a separate new thing or maybe part of [[Transformers Authentics|''Authentics'']]?  The Prime Changer [[Optimus Prime (G1)/toys#Authentics|Optimus]], [[Bumblebee (G1)/toys#Authentics|Bumbleebee]], and [[Megatron (G1)/toys#PrimeChanger|Megatron]] were previously added under ''Authentics'', while someone just started using "Transformers (2026)" for the Tiny Turbo [[Arcee (G1)/toys#Tiny Turbo Changers|Arcee]] and [[Elita One (G1)#Tiny Turbo Changers|Elita]], which got me thinking that we should probably figure this out soon.<br>From what I've gathered they all use "TRA Core" in their listing names, but their packaging design seems identical to current ''Authentics'' packaging design, also lacking a distinct subtitle and focusing on "Evergreen" characters to start off. Then again, Hasbro homogenizing all their packaging designs in the last year makes it hard to tell if this line is meant to be its own thing. Though it is notable that unlike prior ''Authentics'', this "Core" line is using bigger size classes and is available at bigger retailers like Target instead of dollar stores. –[[User:BluJayWarrior|BluJayWarrior]] ([[User talk:BluJayWarrior|talk]]) 18:24, 13 January 2026 (EST)


We usually try to point out Easter eggs and homages [http://tfwiki.net/mediawiki/index.php?title=Nook&diff=1125477&oldid=1125466 such] [http://tfwiki.net/mediawiki/index.php?title=Roboid&diff=1125475&oldid=1125465 as] [http://tfwiki.net/mediawiki/index.php?title=Equinoid&diff=1124708&oldid=1120461 these], don't we?
:I was JUST adding a section here and rather than rewriting...<br>
:Okay just kinda checking in, because thanks to Hasbro's goddamn infuriating thing about not promoting/announcing anything other than the expensive collector crap, the load of sub-line-less not-''Authentics'' "Core" stuff hitting Targets (at least, has anything popped up at Walmart?) is a bit of a "how do we handle this" deal. Both "how much product is there" and "do we treat this as a separate line, as an extension of Authentics despite it not being a 'discount' store line, or what". I'm leaning towards "just list it as its own line with G1 characters unless pretty explicitly otherwise". --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 18:30, 13 January 2026 (EST)
::Oh right, Walmart. Off memory they do have the ''Authentics''-styled [[Bumblebee (G1)/toys#MegaSting|Mega Sting Bumbleebee]] (could also be considered a "larger price point" I guess). No clue if any listings gave it a separate name like "Core" has. Walmart also has a bunch of merch stuff in ''Authentics''-style packaging like big head helicopters, Dancing Transformers and a giant RC Bumblebee. –[[User:BluJayWarrior|BluJayWarrior]] ([[User talk:BluJayWarrior|talk]]) 18:57, 13 January 2026 (EST)


--[[User:Rhymus|Rhymus]] ([[User talk:Rhymus|talk]]) 03:40, 26 September 2016 (EDT)
== Size of the page again ==
:Yeah, I think the fact that one of the Roboids looks like Nook should be pointed out on one or both of those pages. However, I wouldn't call the Equinoids MLP homages unless they're identifiable as based on specific ones, which I don't think is the case. [[User:NovaSaber|NovaSaber]] ([[User talk:NovaSaber|talk]]) 13:48, 26 September 2016 (EDT)


This page is getting pretty long again, so could someone archive the last year? [[User:Hilfam|Hilfam]] ([[User talk:Hilfam|talk]]) 12:03, 22 January 2026 (EST)


== Transformers-Universe links? ==
== Idea for a page? ==
I've noticed some pages now have additional links to the toy summaries at Transformers-Universe.com, for instance [[Scourge (RID)]].  Is this necessary, and was there a discussion of it at the time?  --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] ([[User talk:Thylacine 2000|talk]]) 23:26, 2 October 2016 (EDT)
:It looks like Philister's been adding them.  --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] ([[User talk:ItsWalky|talk]]) 23:45, 2 October 2016 (EDT)


== Captions/Humor ==
Perhaps a page discussing the various Transformers that have "base modes" as a third form, like Powermaster Prime, Motormaster, etc. It's a major recurring gimmick since G1. [[User:DrakeyC|DrakeyC]] ([[User talk:DrakeyC|talk]]) 09:09, 30 January 2026 (EST)
So it kinda hit me that maybe we need a slight updating to our Captions policy page. [[User:M_Sipher/Sandbox:Caption_page|I've put up a Sandbox]] which reflects the "cleanup" direction we've been going in. I'm open to thoughts/rewording. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 05:08, 6 October 2016 (EDT)
:I think a general "[[base mode]]" article would make sense, yeah. [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 10:19, 30 January 2026 (EST)
:"Yes, she is a girl." and "Any and all variations of "dude looks like a lady" or similar "jokes" about transgender people. No. No. NO. (This will get you more than a revert.)" Aren't these already implicitly covered by the note about no gender or sexuality? Should we change to explicitly mention gender identity in that previous note to make it clear? Or leave as is?  --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] ([[User talk:Khajidha|talk]]) 07:17, 6 October 2016 (EDT)
::seconded. frankly shocked to learn there isn't one already --[[User:Arren1234 |Arren Meuchel]] [[User_talk:Arren1234 |(talk)]] 11:58, 30 January 2026 (EST)
::The first one is more a "joke" on the incredibly awkward phrasing of an old Hasbro-written AVP from the Cybertron era... which is frankly so obscure at this point I'm not sure why it's there anyway. "Dude looks like a lady" in particular popped up a distressing number of times in the past ''and'' is a well-known pop music reference, thus the callout, so maybe that should stay, with a "see above" rather than the longer followup. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 13:16, 6 October 2016 (EDT)
:::I think base modes lend themselves better to a category page rather than a full-blown article. What would it even say? “Some Transformers have Base Modes. Here’s a list of all the toys, here’s a list of all the episodes/issues where a base mode appeared.[[User:Cylasbreakdown|Cylasbreakdown]] ([[User talk:Cylasbreakdown|talk]]) 16:51, 4 February 2026 (EST)
:::Maybe make it more obvious that it's ok for new users to get rid of a caption if the joke is blatantly racist/sexist/phobic? --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 15:50, 6 October 2016 (EDT)
::::I don't see why not. We have articles specifically for [[Beast mode]], [[Super Mode]], [[attack mode]], and [[transportation mode]]. For such a prominent feature of Transformers since its early days I'm surprised there doesn't seem to be a specific write-up about city/base modes anywhere, and not even as single mention on the main [[alternate mode]] page. Closest I can find is [[Titan (group)#Alternate modes]]. —[[User:BluJayWarrior|BluJayWarrior]] ([[User talk:BluJayWarrior|talk]]) 18:01, 4 February 2026 (EST)
:::::I attempted a [[User:MahXyme/Sandbox/Base Mode|sandbox for a Base Mode page]] long ago, but I stopped since I realized it would require an extensive amount of work to list all fiction usages & differentiate what counts/what does not count not (something I struggled with the [[Micromaster#The Transformers|Micromasters Transports]] assorments -[[User:MahXyme|MahXyme/MahXymal]] ([[User talk:MahXyme|talk]]) 17:53, 5 February 2026 (EST)
::::::Seems like a good start at least. I'd argue for listing "groups" of base modes (Micromaster Stations, Titans Return Leaders, etc.) rather than individual figures --[[User:Arren1234 |Arren Meuchel]] [[User_talk:Arren1234 |(talk)]] 20:36, 5 February 2026 (EST)


== Combiner team member toys ==
Agreed on the organizational aspects. And, that sandbox is a good start, though yeah, it'd need a lot of work to go through all the toylines and make a comprehensive list. There's also the fact that certain toys with base modes are intended to link to others, some universal and some just one specific bot, so it may be tricky to document when that play feature is prevelant. [[User:DrakeyC|DrakeyC]] ([[User talk:DrakeyC|talk]]) 10:35, 18 February 2026 (EST)


Looking at the pages for various combiner teams, I see several ways of handling the toy section. Some include write ups for every toy of every member, some give bare links to the individual members' toy sections with write ups only for releases of a complete set, some only list complete sets (ignoring releases of individual members, such as Universe Silverbolt, completely). Is there a consensus on how this should be handled? --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] ([[User talk:Khajidha|talk]]) 08:48, 17 October 2016 (EDT)
==About character name translations==
Um... I'm new here. I have a question, and I'm not sure if this question falls under [[Help:Official info]]...


== Japan-exclusive AoE toys ==
That is, I want to add the translated names of some characters. But I want to know what basis this wiki uses to choose foreign translations. Must the foreign translations be ones used by Hasbro and/or TakaraTomy and their licensees in order to remain on this wiki? Can some of the names translated by fan Chinese translation groups be considered valid? Especially in cases where they were the first to provide a translation for a work (possibly the only one) and fixed certain character names.


If we aim to match Japanese-original toys with the corresponding Japanese franchise, then "[[Buzz Saw (AOE)]]", "[[Jolt (AOE)]]", and "[[Sling (AOE)]]" should all have the disambig tag "(LA)" for ''Lost Age'', yes? [[User:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47]] ([[User talk:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|talk]]) 00:26, 20 October 2016 (EDT)
There are also some characters (such as [[Sentinel Maximus]]) whose works may never be introduced by licensors in certain languages, but they do have a commonly used translated name. Should we include this translated name, or just keep it without a translation in that language?
:Normally I'd agree with a suggestion like this, but in this case, I'd be more inclined to keep them at "(AOE)", as there was one overall franchise for the fourth movie but two distinctly-named Japanese toylines for it: Movie Advanced Series and Lost Age Series. The former toyline even bore the English "Age of Extinction" logo from the American toyline on its packaging in addition to its own logo. And with the film itself being renamed "Transformers: Lost Age" in Japanese, that makes a third name involved in this franchise that differs from the other two. I feel it would be more informative/less obstructive to consider the overall franchise under the umbrella term of "Age of Extinction" with the movie itself called "Lost Age" and the two toylines called "Movie Advanced Series" and "Lost Age Series". After all, the franchises of the first three films kept their American names in their Japanese toylines despite the films of both ROTF and DOTM being renamed "Transformers: Revenge" and "Transformers: Darkside Moon" respectively, and the American AOE franchise had two separately-named lines of its own in "Generations" and "Robots in Disguise" as well. Likewise, a similar case could be made for the TF: Prime franchise having ''three'' uniquely named lines in "First Edition", "Robots in Disguise" and "Beast Hunters". A single, consistent, and unifying umbrella term for the overall franchise helps to bring order to all this name chaos and makes information more easily accessible and understood for the Average Joe. That's my piece, anyway. --[[User:Sabrblade|Sabrblade]] ([[User talk:Sabrblade|talk]]) 01:11, 20 October 2016 (EDT)
::I feel like Jolt and Buzz Saw should be merged to their obvious inspirations, anyway. Their categorization under Movieverse is honestly kind of arbitrary. [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 01:24, 20 October 2016 (EDT)
Excellent point. I concur with your judgment, Sabrblade. [[User:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47]] ([[User talk:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|talk]]) 01:51, 21 October 2016 (EDT)


== Remaining Masterforce humans and transtectors ==
For example, when IDW comic books were introduced in China, the translation team at the time translated [[Tarn (G1)]] as '''璇玑湖'''. So this would count as an authorized translation. However, because this translated name has nothing to do with the original meaning (as well as some other controversies surrounding that Chinese translation group), the more common and widely used Chinese translation for [[Tarn (G1)]] is the direct transliteration '''塔恩'''. '''璇玑湖''' has basically been abandoned. In this case, which translation should we choose?


Would anyone object if I went ahead and separated out all the remaining ''Masterforce'' humans and independent robots so that we can have a clear delineation of what the humans versus robots did post-series? [[User:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47]] ([[User talk:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|talk]]) 03:15, 21 October 2016 (EDT)
:I suddenly realized that 塔恩 could be used. The packaging of Blokees does indeed call him 塔恩.
:I think we should pull the toys and merchandise out to another page in the suite. Any toy that represents either is likely to be repurposed as the other, so this would reduce the degree of repetition on the pages. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] ([[User talk:Khajidha|talk]]) 11:20, 21 October 2016 (EDT)
::No, there's no point in making people jump through hoops to get info on maybe two toys. The repetition there is not a bother. Let's stop thinking pedantic and start thinking "does this help the reader in any way at all". --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 13:48, 21 October 2016 (EDT)
:::One extra click is hardly jumping through hoops, and it will make things easier on editors to not have to keep the two sections in sync. [[User:Omegatron|Omegatron]] ([[User talk:Omegatron|talk]]) 19:00, 22 October 2016 (EDT)


== A proposal for reducing clutter ==
Also, does the foreign name used in the product titles by the Hasbro official flagship store count?


I made this proposal on The Allspark Forums' TFWiki thread and am bringing it here for further consideration. I'd like to re-open a discussion that has been discussed several times before. As a result of the above "RID/G1 character merges" topic, several Viron characters who had virtually identical Primax analogues, or who themselves were virtually identical analogues to Primax characters, got the analogues merged with the originals not too long ago. In a similar vein to that, I'd like to open up the suggestion of doing the same for other very similar cases in other continuity families, such as for Henkei! Henkei! Hot Shot, IDW Knock Out, Beast Wars: Uprising Thunderhoof, etc.
Uh, this question might seem a bit silly, or it might come across as a bit strange because I'm speaking English through a translator. But if the existing Wiki rules already cover this issue, please just tell me, thank you.[[User:Micheva|Micheva]] ([[User talk:Micheva|talk]]) 10:18, 12 February 2026 (EST)
:This is a fantastic question. I have no authority here so don’t take this as word of law, but I believe that Romanizations on this wiki (which I think is somewhat similar) are case-by-case. The first romanization of [[Deathsaurus (G1)|Deathsaurus]] was “Deszarus”, but the page is still titled “Deathsaurus” because that’s what the name actually is supposed to be. (Deathsaurus’ name issues are actually pretty interesting, at least to me, and I’d recommend reading the wiki article’s section on it.) Conversely, [[Jallguar]] IS the first romanization used, and the article title, but in that instance I suppose that there isn’t really any convincing reason to use any of the other romanizations we’ve gotten over the years since none of them actually mean anything (it’s just the Japanese word for Jaguar with an extra syllable inserted). I’m rambling. What I would do for foreign names is, stick with the first official translation used, unless you think there’s a compelling reason to use a different one (like what you said with Tarn), and in that case bring it up on the discussion page for the article in question or in the Discord server. [[User:Cylasbreakdown|Cylasbreakdown]] ([[User talk:Cylasbreakdown|talk]]) 02:43, 15 February 2026 (EST)
Now I know very good and well why we have disambiguated these kinds of characters over the years, but with the merging of several Viron and Primax carbon-copy duplicates, I feel the same could possibly be done for other carbon-copy duplicates of other continuity families. I am also well aware of the potential confusion that could arise from this (i.e. - "How is Knock Out BOTH a Prime guy and an IDW G1 guy?!!! That's IMPOSSIBLE!!!"), but bear with me, for I have a very simple proposal that could be the first step in making this kind of character mergers be less confusing than it could be. And that is to simply add the word "originally" to the Continuity Identifier at the top of each original character version's page.
::They need to be translations used in official material. That's just the easiest line in the sand we can make. If different translations are used officially, we note them all, barring obvious typos and the such. [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 05:22, 15 February 2026 (EST)
:::Does the name used for the flagship store count? Those works that were not introduced have kept them without translations, right?[[User:Micheva|Micheva]] ([[User talk:Micheva|talk]]) 06:52, 15 February 2026 (EST)
For example, RID Thunderhoof's current line of:
"''Thunderhoof is a Decepticon from the Robots in Disguise portion of the Aligned continuity family.''"
would instead read as:
"''Thunderhoof is a Decepticon originally from the Robots in Disguise portion of the Aligned continuity family.''"
A simple, elegant, and straightforward addition to the sentence that tells us what is true and factual, and as well that the character type has gone beyond the scope of its continuity family of origin.


Of course, we'd have to be very selective and particular about which articles get merged and which don't. Like, all the prose story namedrops and certain comic background cameos could definitely be merged, while things like G1 and RID Windblade would best remain separate. Any yays, nays, or other comments on this? --[[User:Sabrblade|Sabrblade]] ([[User talk:Sabrblade|talk]]) 20:10, 23 October 2016 (EDT)
Some publications that contain many translations (such as the Chinese version of DW's MTMTE) I actually don't have the resources for, which is a pity.  
:As I said over on AllSpark, I am impressed with the simplicity and elegance of this solution and it's ability to reduce useless clutter and improved user accessibility. --[[User:Jimsorenson|Jimsorenson]] ([[User talk:Jimsorenson|talk]]) 20:12, 23 October 2016 (EDT)
I have come to realize some issues. For instance, if the translation team used a certain translation term when translating a publication, but later discovered that this term was incorrect, they made the correction in their subsequent fan-based translations. However, since the publication was not re-released after its introduction, the translation term in the authorized merchandise could not be modified. Can we adopt the revised translation term provided by this translation team?
:The entire backbone of this wiki's organization is via continuity family.  Ignoring that just because somebody thinks an extra page here or there is "clutter" seems more confusing than the status quo.  I'm not even sure what the platonic ideal is here.  If there's a Maximal Thunderhoof in the G1 continuity family, I'd rather go to a page specifically for that iteration of the character, as with every other single character on the wiki, rather than have to go dig him out of the bottom of somebody else's page.  It's not clutter reduction, it's obfuscation to remove a problem we don't even have. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] ([[User talk:ItsWalky|talk]]) 21:26, 23 October 2016 (EDT)
: I was about to bring up Side Burn, but... god dammit, we already DID this with him?  This makes me FURIOUS.  Is there a discussion somewhere?  I don't see it on this Community Portal.  This isn't "reducing clutter," it's shoving the wiki up its own ass.  --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] ([[User talk:ItsWalky|talk]]) 21:32, 23 October 2016 (EDT)
::ugh.  found it.  what in the fuck --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] ([[User talk:ItsWalky|talk]]) 21:34, 23 October 2016 (EDT)
::Yeah, I can't get behind this. It feels wrong and trying to solve a problem that's not really a problem. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 21:38, 23 October 2016 (EDT)
:::I'm fine if we don't go through with this. To be frank, it was the aforementioned merging of all those Viron and Primax guys (which Jim and Chris were in favor of as well) that got me to think of this idea. Had it not been for all those mergers, I mightn't have even bothered. --[[User:Sabrblade|Sabrblade]] ([[User talk:Sabrblade|talk]]) 21:48, 23 October 2016 (EDT)
::::Something ''else'' I don't really get the point of. This is veering well into Wikipedia-level mooshing. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 21:54, 23 October 2016 (EDT)
:::::Apparently Sabrblade has unwittingly demonstrated the mysterious yet elusive Slippery Slope.  --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] ([[User talk:ItsWalky|talk]]) 22:15, 23 October 2016 (EDT)
::::::Well, I had no involvement in those Viron/Primax mergers, so I dunno what to say about those. I wouldn't be opposed to those mergers being undone if such an undertaking were to be carried out. Seeing them merged came as a surprise to me as well the first time I noticed that they had all been merged. Whatever call everyone decides upon I'm willing to go along with for the good of the Wiki. --[[User:Sabrblade|Sabrblade]] ([[User talk:Sabrblade|talk]]) 22:17, 23 October 2016 (EDT)


:Bluntly, this "issue" can be solved with a Notes section addition.
There is another less rigorous question: Does THE translation given by the authorized Chinese translation and introduction team of Chris McFeely's TRANSFORMERS: THE BASICS count?[[User:Micheva|Micheva]] ([[User talk:Micheva|talk]]) 07:07, 15 February 2026 (EST)
:"Knock Out has a nigh-identical counterpart in the IDW Generation One continuity, because Maighread Scott really likes Knock Out."
:THE BASICS, while incredibly informative, is not official, so no, it would not count. [[User:Cylasbreakdown|Cylasbreakdown]] ([[User talk:Cylasbreakdown|talk]]) 15:52, 16 February 2026 (EST)
:That Note on ''Prime'' Knock Out's page would link to G1 IDW Knock Out, boom, done. And this is '''''really''''' only necessary for bots like Knock Out who share names with more completely different characters than alt-continuity analogues. We wouldn't merge ''or'' make a similar Note for G1/RID Sky-Byte because the only Sky-Bytes that exist are all based directly on that first Sky-Byte. Same with Thunderhoof, because there's only two and that disambiguation up top ought to take care of that. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 22:53, 23 October 2016 (EDT)
::I reiterate, official material only. Mistakes are unfortunate, but that's how it goes and we can't presume unofficial translations will make it into official material. [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 17:42, 16 February 2026 (EST)
::Agreed, it doesn't need to be more complicated than that. I dislike the Primax/Viron mergers as well but I can put up with those. [[User:Omegatron|Omegatron]] ([[User talk:Omegatron|talk]]) 18:12, 24 October 2016 (EDT)
OK, I will do it this way. Strictly follow the official materials.
:I was for the Primax/Viron mergers, but I'm against this, and between the two this is the one I'm more certain about. [[User:NovaSaber|NovaSaber]] ([[User talk:NovaSaber|talk]]) 01:20, 24 October 2016 (EDT)
:Definitely not. It's like asking someone to give you their best car in exchange for a Fiat Multipla. Continuity specific character pages keep the wiki organized, while this "solution" would only add to the confusion of the average new reader. --[[User:Furhun|Furhun]] ([[User talk:Furhun|talk]]) 19:37, 24 October 2016 (EDT)
Well, do the nays have it, or does anyone else wish to speak in support of consolidation? [[User:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47]] ([[User talk:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|talk]]) 22:09, 25 October 2016 (EDT)
:'Twould seem that more of this is being discussed further in the Allspark Wiki thread, beginning with Nevermore's post [http://www.allspark.com/forums/topic/101932-tfwikinet-thread-30/page-283#entry3367709 here]. I've made my peace with whatever is to be decided on this, but for those who wish to continue expressing their views on the matter (be they nay or yay), I'd suggest reviewing some of the points being made in that thread. --[[User:Sabrblade|Sabrblade]] ([[User talk:Sabrblade|talk]]) 22:29, 26 October 2016 (EDT)
::I agree with the point of pruning stuff like the repurposed toys and Club-original characters categories so they're actually useful. [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 11:38, 27 October 2016 (EDT)
:::I am against merging these characters. Full listing of repurposed toys when a character has been simply dropped into another continuity family is useless duplication and an invitation to data drift. Just link to the inspiration's toy section. Yes, clear out the "club original characters" list. It doesn't need to include such continuity transplants or SG characters. Institute simple notes like Siph suggested to inform people of when a character has such a transplanted analogue. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] ([[User talk:Khajidha|talk]]) 12:29, 27 October 2016 (EDT)
::::Yeah, I really think people are Rube-Golberging here when we have much simpler solutions we can and have already implemented. While I appreciate the coding of the "similar versions" template, it just comes across weird and pedantic at best to have redundant disambiguations for the same name up top, since the regular diasmbig link will take people to those exact same characters, who are more than likely gonna be either in the "major _____" section where it's obvious they're "legacy"-style drop-ins, or the disambig list is gonna be so small it's not necessary. At this point, TAAO Velocitronian Knock Out probably belongs in the "major Knock Outs" section of that disambig, so... --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 14:52, 27 October 2016 (EDT)
:::::On the topic of disambig articles having the "exact same characters", one thing I would strongly argue for is expanding the inclusion of renamed versions in the 'Major ____s' sections. I've realised we're doing it to an extent already with Shockblast on the Shockwave disambig, but I think it would be worth it to, for instance, add Animated Snarl and FOC Slug to the 'Major Slags' gallery, even though the names are different.
:::::I also still think that an 'Other versions' gallery or list at the ''bottom'' of articles is still worth considering, if only because right now there's no way to easily find, say, what other continuities the ''Prime'' version of Knock Out has appeared in, short of clicking through to each article in the disambig list in turn and checking. [[User:Jalaguy|Jalaguy]] ([[User talk:Jalaguy|talk]]) 15:09, 27 October 2016 (EDT)
::::::I'm not totally averse to adding the renames to the "Major" sections, though we might want to consider putting them in a row ''under'' the ones who keep the name, marked with a header saying "These characters are based directly on _____ but have have different names due to Trademark issues" or something. It's something I'd want to see some sandboxed layouts for first. Or put them in a new gallery under the "not to be confused withs" so we're not shoving the same-names list all the way down off the first page. That doesn't seem like a good idea.
::::::And yeah, I've already said I'm all for putting in the Notes section ''something'' indicating when a non-A-list non-uber-legacy character has alt-universe transplants. I'm iffy if guys like Sky-Byte who have nothing ''but'' transplants need it, but *shrug*. I'm not sure a gallery is needed when a simple bullet-point list headed up with a short setup sentence will do. Hell, put it under its own subheader so it shows up in the TOC. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 15:26, 27 October 2016 (EDT)
::::::Since ''every'' "Slug" is either based on or an outright alternate name for a "Slag", that would basically mean merging those two disambiguation pages...which is fine with me. But aside from the fact that he was originally going to be named Slag, being a ''Triceratops'' is basically the only thing that makes Animated Snarl any more similar to Dinobots named Slag than to other Dinobots named Snarl, and nobody (I hope) would want to list Triceradon or Knockdown as a "Slag". [[User:NovaSaber|NovaSaber]] ([[User talk:NovaSaber|talk]]) 17:03, 27 October 2016 (EDT)


==Voice actor strike support==
And one more question: Can the translation names used by Hasbro's official store be used in this Wiki?[[User:Micheva|Micheva]] ([[User talk:Micheva|talk]]) 23:40, 16 February 2026 (EST)
So a great many voice actors are going on strike in video game work (not animation) due to shit pay and awful working conditions, being screwed out of royalties, chances to negotiate, etc. Many of them, of course, have worked on TFs past and present. I feel this strike is something we should support. I think at the VERY least a banner or something on the frontpage linking to their union page on the strike, or linking to a "[[Performance Matters]]" page on the wiki on the strike with a fuller explanation AND a link to the union page etc etc etc (and maybe a list of the actors participating in the strike). This movement needs all the eyes n it and support it can get.
:Material from Hasbro is fine. [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 01:50, 17 February 2026 (EST)
:[https://www.sagaftra.org/sag-aftra-members-declare-video-game-strike The union page is here]
Who's up to coding something bannery? --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 03:53, 27 October 2016 (EDT)
:It's just a case of using the imagemap tag.
<div class="plainlinks" style="width:100%; text-align: center"><imagemap>File:PerformanceMatters.jpg|757px|frameless
default [https://www.sagaftra.org/sag-aftra-members-declare-video-game-strike]
desc none</imagemap></div>
:We could maybe take Combiner Wars off the current releases and move everything along one square so there's room at the top? --[[User:Abates|abates]] ([[User talk:Abates|talk]]) 04:43, 27 October 2016 (EDT)


==Faction symbol bullets?==
== So when are we splitting the Legends World characters off? ==
While working on more page revamping, it struck me that it might be a good idea to look into replacing the bullets in the lists with tiny faction symbol markers. On the one hand, it would make things a bit more visually pleasing and sort good bots and bad-bots in the mixed waves.<br>
On the other, I'm not sure how we could pull that off without overloading things. A simple template like <nowiki>"{{bp-a1}}" (bullet point autobot 1)</nowiki>, making sure the graphics are actually tiny and not having the wiki software scale down the images? I mean, there can be HUNDREDS of these on a page. Thoughts from the more technically-minded? --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 16:27, 11 December 2016 (EST)
[[File:custombulletpoints.jpg|thumb|right|200px]]
:I've created this mockup of what it would look like. The coding would be something like:
:<code><nowiki><ul class="iconlist"></nowiki></code>
:<code><nowiki>{{bp-a1|[[Optimus Prime (G1)|Optimus Prime]]}}</nowiki></code>
:<code><nowiki>{{bp-d1|[[Megatron (G1)|Megatron]]}}</nowiki></code>
:<code><nowiki></ul></nowiki></code>
:We'd have to specify the ul tags because mediawiki doesn't have a way to apply css classes to bullet points, as far as I can tell. --[[User:Abates|abates]] ([[User talk:Abates|talk]]) 18:59, 11 December 2016 (EST)
::Okiedoke. Sooo...
{{collist|5|
* a1 (Autobot G1)
* d1 (Autobot G1)
* a2 (Autobot G2)
* d2 (Autobot G2)
* m1 (Maximal BW)
* p1 (Predacon BW)
* mt (Mutant)
* m2 (Maximal BM)
* vh (Vehicon)
* bd (Dinobot BM)
* uc (Unicron)
* ac (Anti-Cybertron)
* mc (Mini-Con)
* p2 (Predacon Prime)
* sa (SG Autobot)
* sd (SG Decepticon)}}
::These seem like the most important ones. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 20:01, 11 December 2016 (EST)
:::I've added in the G1/2 and BW ones so we can try them out. The icons are just the ones from the insignia page resized, so if anyone wants to have a try at making them more legible, feel free. --[[User:Abates|abates]] ([[User talk:Abates|talk]]) 23:15, 11 December 2016 (EST)
::::For some reason it's putting "</li>" at the end. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 23:26, 11 December 2016 (EST)


It should work when they're used. E.G.:
It made sense to keep them together when ''Legends'' first started as Jungle Animals in Decidedly Non-Jungle Situations, and this wasn't worth pursuing before now since it'd be just moving the furniture around. But the lore got deeper and now with ''New Legends'' as ongoing fiction I think it's worth looking at again. As much as Legends World is treated as its own dimension, it is fundamentally just a location easily accessible from the JG1 timeline populated with clones* of Transformers from the wider continuity that exists around it.  And when we write pages for duplicate characters who co-exist, do we not typically split them off?  If that's the yardstick, several Legends Worlders interact with or refer to their JG1 selves, including Rattrap, Rhinox, Waspinator, Arcee, and T-AI. Leo Prime even moves in with Lio Convoy, and keeping those same dudes on the same page is complicating the already complex timeline presented by "[[Age of Primes (End of G1 Universe)|Age of Primes]]". — [[User:TheLastGherkin|TheLastGherkin]] ([[User talk:TheLastGherkin|talk]]) 12:44, 3 March 2026 (EST)
<ul class="iconlist">
<sub>*"clones" is a simpler term for these guys than "magically created lifeforms in a telepathic dream world based on real people from 300 years in the future" but same diff</sub>
{{Bp-a1|[[Optimus Prime (G1)|Optimus Prime]]}}
:It's always been strange to me that they weren't split off already. Having them on the same page is extremely confusing. I'd say go for it. --[[User:Arren1234 |Arren Meuchel]] [[User_talk:Arren1234 |(talk)]] 12:57, 3 March 2026 (EST)
{{Bp-d1|[[Megatron (G1)|Megatron]]}}
:Personally I think this might be overthinking things. I'd agree that it's not quite 1 to 1 with other cross dimension stuff, but functionally Legends Rattrap is a version of the Beast Wars character even if he is in this weird pocket dimension type thing, and ever single "native" to the dimension we see is basically just a comedic version of a pre-existing character. And we've always kept cross dimensional stories with versions of the same character on the same page (Universe, TransTech, et cetera). It makes things complicated, sure, but JG1 stuff has been like that for nearly two decades now. [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 13:00, 3 March 2026 (EST)
{{Bp-a2|[[Grimlock (G1)|Grimlock]]}}
::For my money, there's just ''so much'' with the Legends idiots now, and there's going to keep being more of it, so we'd be best off siloing them into their own pages <s>and not having to think about them any more</s>. Universe and TransTech stories that had the characters interacting were generally one-offs or short runs. This is a Cloud or Galvatron II situation, to me. --[[User:Broadside|Broadside]] ([[User talk:Broadside|talk]]) 13:45, 3 March 2026 (EST)
{{Bp-d2|[[Starscream (G1)|Starscream]]}}
:I am on the record as considering reader experience our prime directive and this would be such a drastic improvement to the readability of our coverage of the Legends rat's nest that I've been meaning to suggest it for years. Consider me emphatically in favor. --[[User:AzimuthAcolyte|AzimuthAcolyte]] ([[User talk:AzimuthAcolyte|talk]]) 20:12, 3 March 2026 (EST)
{{Bp-m1|[[Optimus Primal]]}}
:I think I'm also generally leaning towards "this is already complicated and it's just going to get more complicated so let's detangle this shit sooner rather than later." -- [[User:Cyberlink420|Cyberlink420]] ([[User talk:Cyberlink420|talk]]) 20:19, 3 March 2026 (EST)
{{Bp-p1|[[Megatron (BW)|Megatron]]}}
::Fine with this idea. Are we using Japanese names since those characters have never shown up in material with Hasbro names? [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 20:31, 3 March 2026 (EST)
{{Bp-mt|[[Soundwave (BW)|Soundwave]]}}
:::That feels unnecessarily pedantic. --[[User:Broadside|Broadside]] ([[User talk:Broadside|talk]]) 22:16, 3 March 2026 (EST)
{{Bp-m2|[[Optimus Primal]]}}
::::One could make the argument that it's too steeped in Japanese fan culture/terminology to use the Hasbro names, but I really only care about the human characters having Japanese names (because they're normal people living in Tokyo and wouldn't be named things like "T-AI"). [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 22:25, 3 March 2026 (EST)
{{Bp-vh|[[Tankor (BM)|Tankor]]}}
:::::Also, I think Roadbuster, Whirl, and Windblade can stay as they are, since all three are meant to be the main JG1 versions of those characters anyway. [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 22:37, 3 March 2026 (EST)
{{Bp-bd|[[Magmatron]]}}
:::I'm theoretically in favour of Japanese names, since it would improve legibility of say, the time Rattle and Rattrap teamed up – and we're absolutely keeping Lio Convoy, since Leo Prime has gone through a textual name change – BUT: characters with toys, at least, had both the Japanese and Hasbro names on their packaging.  It would be inconsistent to have Rattrap and Waspinator and Optimus Primal alongside Cheetus and — I can't think of another example, but I'm interrupting this train of thought because I CAN think of Optimus Minor being made Primal's son on the basis of Beast Convoy's western name.  And how many minor guys like, I dunno, Build Boy, are named in dialogue?  We could always title the article Wedge and slap a Noname-uncomfirmed on that bad boy like how we did with ''Shattered Glass'' in the distant past.
</ul>
:::Also, what are we feeling is best for a disambig?  (Legends)?  (LG)?  (LW)? — [[User:TheLastGherkin|TheLastGherkin]] ([[User talk:TheLastGherkin|talk]]) 04:43, 4 March 2026 (EST)
--[[User:Abates|abates]] ([[User talk:Abates|talk]]) 23:28, 11 December 2016 (EST)
::::Or we could go with the Kre-O approach of "major characters get their own pages, cameos don't" I GUESS — [[User:TheLastGherkin|TheLastGherkin]] ([[User talk:TheLastGherkin|talk]]) 04:53, 4 March 2026 (EST)
:Okay, I'd left off the <nowiki>"<ul>"s</nowiki>. Noice. I THINK we might need some half-and-halfs for multipacks. But that shouldn't be too many, I think... G1, G2, BW, SG... Oh and I guess Auto/Prime-Pred and Decep/Prime-Pred. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 23:39, 11 December 2016 (EST)
::::Minor is only called "Minor" in Legends, so he wouldn't get the full name. I vote (Legends). [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 05:01, 4 March 2026 (EST)
::I had a try at doing some split icons for the multipacks, but haven't had any luck. I did adjust the style to move the icons down a smidge so they line up better with the text, though it requires adding in a class to the ul tag thus: <nowiki><ul class="iconlist"></nowiki> --[[User:Abates|abates]] ([[User talk:Abates|talk]]) 05:03, 12 December 2016 (EST)
:::::I second the "(Legends)" motion. It's the name of the franchise these character debuted in, in the name of the world they live in, and it's one word. We don't put Masterforce characters at "MF", for instance, and "Legends" isn't even a compound word that ''could'' be abbreviated. --[[User:Sabrblade|Sabrblade]] ([[User talk:Sabrblade|talk]]) 16:32, 4 March 2026 (EST)
::Can you give it just a tiny nudge to the right? So they end up slightly indented under the column headers, which makes them easier to read. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 05:50, 12 December 2016 (EST)
::::::Doing a cursory sweep we appear to have already used "(Legends)" for a [[:Category:Transformers Legends episodes|bazillion mobile game events]] such that it might be prudent to avoid that one. My two cents would be to either use the "(LG)" abbreviation from the packaging/story titles/etc or straight up spell out "(Legends World)" for absolute maximum clarity. --[[User:AzimuthAcolyte|AzimuthAcolyte]] ([[User talk:AzimuthAcolyte|talk]]) 17:50, 4 March 2026 (EST)
:::Tweaked. I think I've got it approximately the same indent as the non-icon lists now. --[[User:Abates|abates]] ([[User talk:Abates|talk]]) 06:14, 12 December 2016 (EST)
::::::I'm leaning towards LG: it's on every toy box and in the title of the vast majority of chapters.  Plus, Deadlock uses it in-universe.  And it's shorter! — [[User:TheLastGherkin|TheLastGherkin]] ([[User talk:TheLastGherkin|talk]]) 18:02, 4 March 2026 (EST)
:::::::"Legends" is also spoken in-universe countless times all throughout the Legends manga series, even in the most recent End of G1 Universe comic starring the green Lio Convoy. The reason "LG" is on every toy box is because it's part of each toy's ID number, which we have never let dictate any of our disambiguation tags. Otherwise, we'd be using "(BT)" instead of "(Binaltech)", "(MP)" instead of "(Masterpiece)", "(UN)" instead of "(United)", "(TG)" instead of "(Generations)", "(TAV)" instead of "(Adventure)", "(PP)" for Power of the Primes instead of "(POTP)", "(SG)" instead of "(Siege)", "(TCV)" instead of "(Cyberverse)", "(ER)" instead of "(Earthrise)", "(KD)" instead of "(Kingdom)", "(TL)" instead of "(Legacy)", etc. That [[Transformers Legends (mobile game)|Transformers Legends mobile game]] (which has been dead for over a decade, even) that "(Legends)" is currently being used for is a nonissue when "(Legends)" is ''also'' currently being used for things from the [[Transformers Legends (book)|Transformers Legends anthology book]], particularly [[Susan (Legends)]]. And "(Legends)" has already been in use for things from the Legends manga, too, like [[Groundshaker (Legends)]], [[Synapse (Legends)]], [[Duncan (Legends)]], and [[Plasma Energy Chamber (Legends)]]. It's no different from how we use "(RID)" for things from both the 2001 and 2025 franchises, "(Universe)" for things from both the 2003 and 2008 franchises, and "(Generations)" for things from both the pre-Combiner Wars toyline and from the series of Japanese guidebooks. --[[User:Sabrblade|Sabrblade]] ([[User talk:Sabrblade|talk]]) 00:37, 5 March 2026 (EST)
::::::::Yes, the principle was always "least disambiguation necessary for titles". A particular disambiguation is fine to be used by different things. [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 02:13, 5 March 2026 (EST)
:::::::::Speaking personally I cannot say I am terribly invested in any specific disambig so if y'all feel that strongly about "(Legends)," so be it. --[[User:AzimuthAcolyte|AzimuthAcolyte]] ([[User talk:AzimuthAcolyte|talk]]) 15:00, 5 March 2026 (EST)
:Historically I've leaned more in the direction of "this feels like putting these dumb animals on too much of a pedestal", given the meta-importance that page splits tend to imply to the wiki's audience, ''but'' I find the "these are functionally clones who exist within JG1 continuity specifically, not just 'normal' alternate versions of the characters" framing pretty compelling, so I'm surprising myself by saying I wouldn't be opposed to a split at this point. Making stuff like multiple Lios Convoy interacting less insane to write about is definitely a bonus too. [[User:Jalaguy|Jalaguy]] ([[User talk:Jalaguy|talk]]) 04:34, 4 March 2026 (EST)
::Oh, also, and I hope it would go without saying, but obviously the toys that technically represent Transformerised Legends World guys would need to go on both pages (which I think we're already doing anyway for cases like the Targetmasters that are actually technically Kiss Players and Beastformers and stuff). [[User:Jalaguy|Jalaguy]] ([[User talk:Jalaguy|talk]]) 04:41, 4 March 2026 (EST)


REALLY not liking this. Looks far too cluttered to me. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] ([[User talk:Khajidha|talk]]) 13:57, 12 December 2016 (EST)
Thinking about it more, the Galvatron II example is more presuasive to me; a suite style situation would be fine. As for names, I don't really care about T-AI but for any of the Transformers I think that's a bit much. [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 08:08, 4 March 2026 (EST)


Request for vehicon template [[User:Jcbynum1|Jcbynum1]] 16:10, 12 December 2016 (EST)
Having gone through [[:Category:Legends World natives]] and [[:Category:Legends World humans]], if we apply the Kre-O Rule of Notability, that gives us the following:
:Added the Beast Machines ones. --[[User:Abates|abates]] ([[User talk:Abates|talk]]) 16:30, 12 December 2016 (EST)
*'''Split:''' Airazor, Arcee, Big Convoy, Bighorn, Blackarachnia, Cheetor, Dinobot, Lio Convoy, Lio Junior, Megatron, Nightscream, Optimus Minor, Optimus Primal, Rattrap, Rhinox, Scorponok, Scuba, Scylla, Silverbolt, Stampy, Starscream, Tarantulas, Terrorsaur, Tigatron, Waspinator, Nightbeat, T-AI
::Request for mini-cons template [[User:Jcbynum1|Jcbynum1]] 17:10, 12 December 2016 (EST)
*'''Lump:''' Roadbuster, Whirl, basically every real person making a cameo
:::Added! --[[User:Abates|abates]] ([[User talk:Abates|talk]]) 19:45, 12 December 2016 (EST)
*'''Small roles:''' Archadis, Armordillo, BB, Break, Bump, Colada, Diver, Drill Nuts, Gas Skunk, Guiledart, Heinrad, Ikard, Inferno, Longrack, Magmatron, Megastorm, Kobanzametarō, Prowl, Quickstrike, Rampage, Randy, Ravage, Saberback, Sling, Star Upper, Tasmania Kid, Transmutate, Venom, Wedge, Wolfang, Kelly, Kenneth Onishi, Koji Onishi
::::Request for Shattered Glass templates [[User:IronyMann|IronyMann]] ([[User talk:IronyMann|talk]]) 03:48, 13 December 2016 (EST)
*'''TBD:''' Botanica (doesn't have a write-up yet), Buzz Saw (does not appear in JG1 elsewhere), Savage and Noble, Tank Drones (do we split subgroups?)
:::::Request for Combatron template for Japanese releases. [[User:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47]] ([[User talk:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|talk]]) 07:41, 13 December 2016 (EST)
[[User:TheLastGherkin|TheLastGherkin]] ([[User talk:TheLastGherkin|talk]]) 09:02, 4 March 2026 (EST)
:::::: Request for Unicron faction symbol. [[User:Grum|Grum]] ([[User talk:Grum|talk]]) 13:14, 13 December 2016 (EST)
:The Kre-O thing is because some characters (in fiction or toys) can't be exclusively slotted into G1 or movie buckets since they shift design cues between them. I think it's easier to just be consistent with the Legends gremlin people (other than real people cameos). Sensible to keep the sentient toys (Mini-Cons, Encore Big Convoy) and the three JG1 inductees (Roadbuster, Whirl, Windblade) on their respective character pages, I think. Like Wolfang/Howlinger, Buzz Saw exists in JG1 somewhere off-camera, since they got his toy. I don't think Tank Drone needs another page; it's a mass-produced bodytype that can cover instances across universes, not a specific person. [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 09:19, 4 March 2026 (EST)
::::::: I have added these. Unified documentation is [[Template:Bp-a1/doc|here]]. --[[User:Abates|abates]] ([[User talk:Abates|talk]]) 17:43, 13 December 2016 (EST)
::I'm somewhere in the middle between "splitting them off the main article would help improve readability, yes," and "splitting them off entirely feels a bit too far since all of them are essentially just different versions of the main Beast Wars et al characters", so I think going the aforementioned route of suiting them would be the cleanest solution. Keeps them joined at the hip with the main versions that they're basically new versions of, while also giving them their own webpages to tidy up readability on the main pages. The Galvatron II analogy is very apropos in this case. --[[User:Sabrblade|Sabrblade]] ([[User talk:Sabrblade|talk]]) 10:01, 4 March 2026 (EST)
Off the top of my head while going through the Beast Wars page, we'll need hybrid Maximal/Predacon insignias and then... what do we do for oddball one-off things like the Starscream/Waspinator 2-pack? [[User:Grum|Grum]] ([[User talk:Grum|talk]]) 16:32, 12 December 2016 (EST)
::Coming back to this with refreshed knowledge, Botanica is split, Buzz Saw is small roles (which is now also split), Savage and Noble are split both from Noble (BM) and from each other, and Rhinox/Tankor can go on the same page. [[User:TheLastGherkin|TheLastGherkin]] ([[User talk:TheLastGherkin|talk]]) 18:02, 4 March 2026 (EST)
:Is Waspinator actually labeled as a Pred in that set, or a Decep? Honestly in either case I'd be okay with just using the Decepticon symbol. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 16:36, 12 December 2016 (EST)


Will entries on the [[Transformers: Cybertron (toyline)|''Cybertron'' toyline page]] need two bullets each for faction and associated planet? [[User:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47]] ([[User talk:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|talk]]) 07:45, 13 December 2016 (EST)
So uh. I've come around on the split pages. However...I don't think completely removing any reference to them on the Beast Wars pages themselves is particularly helpful? Whether it be a suite or a "see this article for more information" I don't mind, but there should be some reference since like Sabrblade says, they are just comedic versions of the Beast Wars guys. [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 07:37, 6 March 2026 (EST)
:No. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 13:00, 13 December 2016 (EST)
:Maybe do the disambiguation like this? [[User:Cylasbreakdown|Cylasbreakdown]] ([[User talk:Cylasbreakdown|talk]]) 14:09, 6 March 2026 (EST) {{disambig3.5|the Beast Wars Maximal|his Legends World counterpart|Rattrap (Legends)|Rattrap}}


Sorry, when I called it the "Unicron" symbol, I meant the Blentron Unicron-head symbol. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 19:07, 13 December 2016 (EST)
:Ahhh, got it! --[[User:Abates|abates]] ([[User talk:Abates|talk]]) 19:51, 13 December 2016 (EST)


Uploading some half-an-half icons. I'm not making the templates because I'm bluntly not feeling up to it. Just getting the visuals out of the way. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 21:44, 13 December 2016 (EST)
Alright, I've decided that for now I'm just going to add a note and a link mostly because I have little patience when it comes to formatting suite links. It's going to be along these lines:


== Kre-O pages with toys ==
{{note|Due to the unique nature of ''Legends'' place within JG1 continuity, we've opted to separate out this version of the character into its own micro-page. See [article link] for more details.}}


The merging of ''Kre-O'' characters who are unambiguously based on 1 existing archetype with said archetype fell to the wayside some time ago. Anyone want to join me in restarting it?  [[User:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47]] ([[User talk:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|talk]]) 00:54, 27 December 2016 (EST)
If anyone has any objections or comments, leave them below. Otherwise I'll just implement it tomorrow. [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 19:28, 6 March 2026 (EST)
:I didn't merge them back then because Sipher nixed the idea. If there's no opposition now, I'll help with merging them. [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 01:29, 27 December 2016 (EST)
:I don't think this is necessary, but this can be phrased in-universe if we really need it. (<nowiki>"In the [[Zamojin (species)|Zamojin]]-created [[Legends World]], its [[Character (Legends)|Character]]'s existence formed based on Character."</nowiki> or something around that.) [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 19:55, 6 March 2026 (EST)
::Wasn't around when Sipher nixed it, but I'll help too as many have been merged already. [[User:Jcbynum1|Jcbynum1]] ([[User talk:Jcbynum1|talk]]) 07:08, 27 December 2016 (EST)
::Yeah, I like that much better. If nothing else it draws way less attention to itself. --[[User:Broadside|Broadside]] ([[User talk:Broadside|talk]]) 21:55, 6 March 2026 (EST)
:::If we go through with this, we should probably begin by compiling a list to avoid any confusion over who does and does not qualify. [[User:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47]] ([[User talk:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|talk]]) 02:43, 28 December 2016 (EST)
:::Seconding Saix that this feels unnecessary, seconding Broadside that Saix's version is more straightforward if we must. --[[User:AzimuthAcolyte|AzimuthAcolyte]] ([[User talk:AzimuthAcolyte|talk]]) 22:12, 6 March 2026 (EST)
::::Already made a list [[User:Saix#preelm_Kre-O_merge_list|here]]. [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 06:16, 28 December 2016 (EST)
::::My thinking is that treating them as completely separate from the regular versions is not really accurate/a bit "inside baseball. Like I said at the start, they aren't quite the same as different counterparts from another universe, sure, but they are still very specifically comedic versions of the Beast Wars characters, down to the fact that they briefly turn into them late in the series. It's why I find the Galvatron II comparison more compelling for accessibility reasons (frankly, the main Galvatron article could also use a note explaining why he's separate too). As for the wording, again I think the in-universe thing is a bit inside baseball, and not clear immediately to users who have no idea what Legends is. If people have suggestions for a better way of wording a precise explanation, I'm all for it, but I still think the intent of my suggestion is more accessible to readers. I'm also still very open to suiting the articles, but I've always struggled with the way templates work, so if anyone else is up for the task, I'm all for it. [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 22:27, 6 March 2026 (EST)
I'm not sure the combiners should be merged. All of them have a distinct lineup, and the Terrorcons are a mix of G1 and ''Prime'' influences. [[User:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47]] ([[User talk:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|talk]]) 15:58, 28 December 2016 (EST)
:::::If I'm being honest, I would prefer suites too, for all the reasons that have been given, and because the Legends World natives are stated by Leo Prime to be the "bunshin" (分身) of the normal BW characters, denoting an inherent connection between them: 君達レジェンズ世界のビースト市民は我らG1世界のビースト戦士の分身だ. 今こそ! その内なる野獣を全て呼び覚ますんだ. But if others feel that strongly enough against suites to overrule that preference, I can accept the little note proposal instead. --[[User:Sabrblade|Sabrblade]] ([[User talk:Sabrblade|talk]]) 00:01, 7 March 2026 (EST)
:"Distinct lineup" is pretty weak now we have Combiner Wars combiners with varying members and the G1 Terrorcons have used their Prime designs. [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 16:22, 28 December 2016 (EST)
:For what it's worth, I'd planned to give Legends World headings to characters who exist fictionally in that world, [https://tfwiki.net/mediawiki/index.php?title=Rattrap_%28BW%29&diff=1899083&oldid=1898497 like so,] to cover their "fictional" appearances. [[User:TheLastGherkin|TheLastGherkin]] ([[User talk:TheLastGherkin|talk]]) 05:58, 7 March 2026 (EST)
I'm not sure if the ''Universe'' Soundwave Kreon should go on ''Machine Wars'' Soundwave's page, but what about putting the ''Music Label'' Soundwave Kreon on ''Shattered Glass'' Soundwave's page since the latter is precedent for independent white Soundwaves? [[User:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47]] ([[User talk:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|talk]]) 00:34, 3 January 2017 (EST)
::That was what I figured we would have as well in those cases; I know there's plenty of them who do show up fictionally or as toys just based on my memories. [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 08:11, 7 March 2026 (EST)
:While attempting to get into the endgame metaphysical hooey connecting the Legends World natives to the Transformers of JG1 on every individual character article still feels like it would do more harm than good intelligibility-wise to me, I will say that after sitting with it a while I would not be opposed to making some kind of centralized "Legends World native" article laying it all out in detail and then linking out to it everywhere. --[[User:AzimuthAcolyte|AzimuthAcolyte]] ([[User talk:AzimuthAcolyte|talk]]) 16:13, 7 March 2026 (EST)
::I should clarify, my thinking is that there are bound to be users who will see images from the comics, recognize instinctively that they are comedy versions of the Beast Wars characters, and go to those pages and be confused why they aren't there. Yes, they could go to the disambiguation page, but I've always felt that we should optimize things for the least amount of clicking. What separates this from a Cloud type situation to me is that there are enough vagaries there that I understand the argument to split them out (the lore of that depiction of Cybertron, things like Grimlock's backstory); the Legends characters and a lot of the jokes around them exist solely in the context of either the JP Beast Wars and Beast Machines dubs (Silverbolt's depiction, Airazor and Nightscream's whole...thing, Depth Charge's fish gun thing being a character that can talk), or the BWII cartoon characters (Bighorn's infatuation with Scylla, Big Convoy being a teacher at a school as a comedic version of him as a military instructor). In-fiction, sure, they are kind of clones, but it's not the same thing as say, the Optimus Prime clone from the cartoon, because of the metaphysical stuff involved. I think that potentially presenting them as having no connection would not be fully honest. [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 16:28, 7 March 2026 (EST)
:::I don’t think we need a dedicated “Legends World native” page, the existing [[Legends World]] article already sums it up pretty nicely. We could direct people there. [[User:Cylasbreakdown|Cylasbreakdown]] ([[User talk:Cylasbreakdown|talk]]) 18:02, 7 March 2026 (EST)
::::Although, if such a page for the Legends World inhabitants were to be made, the in-story name used for those people is "Legends World citizen" (レジェンズ世界の市民 ''Rejenzu sekai no shimin'') with those based on beast-moded characters (as in, those who possess [[Beast Power]]) referred to as either "Animal-type citizens" (動物型の市民 ''Dōbutsu-gata no shimin'') or "Beast citizens" (ビースト市民 ''Bīsuto shimin''). --[[User:Sabrblade|Sabrblade]] ([[User talk:Sabrblade|talk]]) 14:47, 8 March 2026 (EDT)


== Final Facebook fiction  ==
== Out of date MediaWiki ==


Notice to all: Fun Publications is doing one final round of Facebook story posts. Let's wait at least a little while for this storyline to finish up before we add anything to the wiki. [[User:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47]] ([[User talk:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|talk]]) 16:47, 31 December 2016 (EST)
So, uh, [[Special:Version|this place is on MediaWiki 1.19.20]]. The 1.19.* branch went EOL back in '''''2015''''', and isn't even the last 1.19.* (which was 1.19.24). That dpesn't seem safe for y'all.


== Derailment & Uprising pages ==
(For context, the current LTS is 1.39.17, which is the oldest supported branch. The most current version is 1.45.1.) {{unsigned|Hello Goodbye|2026-03-14T08:31}}


A number of small debates are popping up here and there about character pages for BWU. I thought we could agree here on some general rules for how to handle these pages, so the same conversation doesn't keep happening on several talk pages. There will be technicalities in certain cases, as always, but in general...
== irc needed ==
:* Characters drawn from non-Primax continuity families will get a new page, with a (BW) disambig. Aurex Mini-Cons like [[Synapse (BW)]], Uniend Predacons like [[Budora (BW)]], etc.
:* Exceptions will be for the Primax straddling Viron and Kre-O borrowed characters like [[Movor]] or [[Freefall (Kre-O)]]. Battle Beasts turned Cybertronians for Uprising will also be on the same page.
:* Some characters deliberately straddle two existing characters, like Deluge, Wideload, Stockade, Eagle Killer, etc. Individual consideration is necessary.
::* If the "composite" character draws more heavily on one existing character than the other (like Wideload who's clearly the Throttlebot but only borrowing the body-type and faction of the Classics Mini-Con), text should go on the more prominent page.
::* If the "composite" character is equally weighted, or little more than a cameo and a description, like Eagle Killer, it may be better to create a third Eagle Killer (BW) page acknowledging it as distinct from the two previous characters.
Anyone disagree with these guidelines, or have others they wish to add? --[[User:Xaaron|Xaaron]] ([[User talk:Xaaron|talk]]) 17:39, 1 January 2017 (EST)
:What about a character/toy already spanning multiple non-G1 continuity families? Back when [[Rav (DOTM)]] appeared (not in beast mode) in "[[Identity Politics]]", I created [[Rav (BW)]]. But [[Catilla (DOTM)]] appears in "Derailment" (under "Katilla"). [[User:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47]] ([[User talk:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|talk]]) 17:48, 1 January 2017 (EST)
::Which is one reason for this thread, so we can at least get some consistent treatment. Those (DOTM) Mini-Cons seem like an odd situation. Am I right in assuming they weren't split when AVP used them in an Aurex cluster because there just wasn't enough material to bother having two pages? If we want to say ''"These (DOTM) guys have extremely small roles in multiple continuity families, so hug it, we're just going to have one page for each"'', I'm not...opposed to that. Depends on if someone has strong feelings about preserving the rule of splitting characters by Continuity Family. --[[User:Xaaron|Xaaron]] ([[User talk:Xaaron|talk]]) 18:08, 1 January 2017 (EST)
::My bad on the Katilla front. I saw the ''Uprising'' header on his page and thought that meant it was were his fiction was meant to go. (Sorry.) [[User:Smasher|Smasher]] ([[User talk:Smasher|talk]]) 22:48, 1 January 2017 (EST)
The Book of Logos and the Lio Convoy historical paper are pretty extensive. Shall we create story articles for them as we did for "[[A Brush With Infamy]]"? Perhaps as well with the Predacon Manifesto? [[User:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47]] ([[User talk:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|talk]]) 22:28, 1 January 2017 (EST)
:I agree. Separate characters, separate events. Too extensive to try and lay out in the Notes section alone. --[[User:Xaaron|Xaaron]] ([[User talk:Xaaron|talk]]) 22:42, 1 January 2017 (EST)
Can anyone identify these characters? On page 33 of "Derailment" there is a "teal and grey Predacon" with a wrist-mounted autocannon. On page 55 there's a male "grey/purple" Micromaster. And more likely to be generics: on page 33 is an "enterprising Maximal ro-simian" and on page 118 is a "red and green" male Maximal who is converted into a Vehicon. [[User:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47]] ([[User talk:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|talk]]) 23:30, 1 January 2017 (EST)


== Classics survivors on Axiom Nexus ==
need an irc channel populated by at least 1 wiki admin. when i tried to register, the dnsbl identified me as open proxy and prevented registration. where i am from, dynamic ips and nat/network address translation is used alot so legitimate ips are mistakenly identified as such. there was no way to contact any admin about this until i lucked out. i suggest an irc channel on rizon because rizon provides cloak for all by default -- [[User:Mussharraf Hossen Shoikot|Mussharraf Hossen Shoikot]] ([[User talk:Mussharraf Hossen Shoikot|talk]]) 10:16, 7 April 2026 (EDT)
:We have no intention of implementing an IRC channel due to the required amount of time needed to maintain and monitor it outweighing its uses. There are no shortage of other ways to get in contact with wiki personnel, such as through social media or our public Discord server. -- [[User:Cyberlink420|Cyberlink420]] ([[User talk:Cyberlink420|talk]]) 16:19, 15 April 2026 (EDT)
::social media and discord currently unavailable for me. irc can be a side method without needing much monitor and maintaining if one is willing to use it as that. only need 1 admin on it. if a channel not possible, have you or any other admin register on rizon irc using /msg nickserv register command and i will be able to send memo which they can later read using /msg memoserv read command and respond to using /msg memoserv send command -- [[User:Mussharraf Hossen Shoikot|Mussharraf Hossen Shoikot]] ([[User talk:Mussharraf Hossen Shoikot|talk]]) 10:52, 16 April 2026 (EDT)
:::That still requires resources and time that we might not have to maintain and monitor an IRC channel just for a possible small number of users, which is not beneficial in the long run. When you say "social media and discord currently unavailable" for you, do you mean that your ISP is blocking certain sites? (We also have a Bluesky account.) --[[User:Lonegamer78|Lonegamer78]] ([[User talk:Lonegamer78|talk]]) 08:18, 17 April 2026 (EDT)
::::connecting to rizon irc, registering and sending memos do not require any channel. why cannot any admins do this? i send memo to registered admin on irc, they can see it next time they login to irc -- [[User:Mussharraf Hossen Shoikot|Mussharraf Hossen Shoikot]] ([[User talk:Mussharraf Hossen Shoikot|talk]]) 04:47, 18 April 2026 (EDT)
:::::I'm sorry, but who uses IRC in 2026? [[User:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47]] ([[User talk:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|talk]]) 06:04, 18 April 2026 (EDT)
::::::I mean I'm sure some small niche communities use it, but that's neither here nor there. The primary issue is that this wiki is a voluntary, in-your-own-time deal, even for the admins. Nobody's getting paid to do this, we all have other things going on in our lives. The Discord is itself something only some of us keep tabs on, and not even every portion of it. You're asking people who are already pretty stretched to keep track of something else just for you. I'm sorry, but that's not feasible. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 16:21, 18 April 2026 (EDT)
:check what i said about memoserv. memoserv does not require much tracking, only logging in. can there not be 1 admin registered on rizon server? -- [[User:Mussharraf Hossen Shoikot|Mussharraf Hossen Shoikot]] ([[User talk:Mussharraf Hossen Shoikot|talk]]) 10:43, 19 April 2026 (EDT)
::You have already been told no and given reasons why by three different administrators. The decision is not going to change. Please drop the subject. -- [[User:Cyberlink420|Cyberlink420]] ([[User talk:Cyberlink420|talk]]) 12:14, 19 April 2026 (EDT)
:how about this? no channels. 1 login to rizon server every 120 hours or higher intervals to see if i have sent any memos. possible? -- [[User:Mussharraf Hossen Shoikot|Mussharraf Hossen Shoikot]] ([[User talk:Mussharraf Hossen Shoikot|talk]]) 10:42, 20 April 2026 (EDT)
::I legitimately do not understand why you expect admins to bend over your request on building an infrastructure that you're tacitly admitting only you would use, lmao ([[User:FortressMaxxing|FortressMaxxing]] ([[User talk:FortressMaxxing|talk]]) 10:59, 20 April 2026 (EDT))
::No. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 12:10, 20 April 2026 (EDT)


How do we cite that final back page from OTFCC issue #72 in the Fiction sections? Where the Classics characters survived into Axiom Nexus? Just {{storylink|Hasbro Transformers Collectors' Club issue 72}}?
== When does controversy surrounding a figure prove worthy enough to mention? ==
:"Epilogue" was the only thing we called it. (Thanks, Jesse) --[[User:Jimsorenson|Jimsorenson]] ([[User talk:Jimsorenson|talk]]) 11:24, 2 January 2017 (EST)
::I just took it as part of the OMAM comic. [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 12:57, 2 January 2017 (EST)


== GoBots sister wiki: An Ultimatum ==
Thinking about the whole Nexus and ss86 astro situation rn, it kinda feels like theyre the [[Elephant|elephants]] in the room that we probably have to acknowledge. However, they're not documented. Makes me wonder: any criteroa I should follow seeing these types of situations before its eligible to memtion here?[[User:Poliwag06|Poliwag06]] ([[User talk:Poliwag06|talk]]) 22:37, 27 April 2026 (EDT)
:I think you need to stop giving overinflated importance to opinions you see online. [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 22:42, 27 April 2026 (EDT)
: Nobody cares, Moby. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 23:35, 27 April 2026 (EDT)
:: ...I guess I'll take that as "never allowed" then.[[User:Poliwag06|Poliwag06]] ([[User talk:Poliwag06|talk]]) 23:40, 27 April 2026 (EDT)
:What controversy is this supposed to be? [[User:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47]] ([[User talk:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|talk]]) 00:32, 28 April 2026 (EDT)
::The complaints about Nexus not being a combiner and the many, many criticisms of SS86 Astrotrain about inaccuracies/proportions etc. (Ok maybe the latter can somewhat be ignored because its just people critiquing his flaws once they got him in hand+stock images+they dont like how he looks compared to Siege).[[User:Poliwag06|Poliwag06]] ([[User talk:Poliwag06|talk]]) 00:52, 28 April 2026 (EDT)
::: People were whining about Nexus info from leaks before the post on Mark Maher's personal Instagram account and actual announcements by Hasbro confirming that yes, Nexus is a combiner frame compatible figure that can fit into the AOTP Superion, and yes, Nexus is going to be a full combiner later in 2027, we just don't know what that'll look like and I hope it's a full commander class combiner frame and four deluxe limbs (neither are confirmed as of this minute). The discourse over him not being a combiner is from stolen and unreliable info, so why add more fuel to a flame that people started themselves less than a week before the actual reveal of the Voyager figure? -[ [[User:Singularity|Singularity]] ([[User talk:Singularity|talk]]) 02:11, 28 April 2026 (EDT) ]
:Is this just about the fact that SS86 Astrotrain looks like ass? If so... I'll be the dissenting voice here and say that yes, there should be space to maybe mention the general reception of a given figure into a toy section, ''as long'' as it reflects the broader evaluation of the community and doesn't just become an editor's sole personal gripes with a given toy. With SS86 Astrotrain, I do think the consensus is pretty settled at least (though I have no idea about what's up with Nexus Prime). ([[User:FortressMaxxing|FortressMaxxing]] ([[User talk:FortressMaxxing|talk]]) 01:00, 28 April 2026 (EDT))
::Nexus complaints are mostly hes not a gestalt (source: prematurely released images) and his alt mode being a flying brick, though it has settled down a bit when people got their hands on him. I think the former may or may not be connected to why they had to post that pic that he had a torso mode (which is apparently not shown on the box or called out, much like Sideways' head swapping).[[User:Poliwag06|Poliwag06]] ([[User talk:Poliwag06|talk]]) 01:05, 28 April 2026 (EDT)
:::You yourself said "source: prematurely released images" so why are you complaining over stolen pictures that had little to no context to them since they were leaks? Most if not all of the complaints about the figure being "not a gestalt" were dissuaded with the info given to us from the official reveal video (linked in the references of AOTP Nexus' article) and Mark Maher's post of Nexus wearing Superion (also linked in the references of AOTP Nexus' article). Also, "his alt mode being a flying brick" is a matter of taste. Nexus fits perfectly with my Diaclone Jumpstarter redecos as Topspin and Twin Twist are now combiners thanks to Titans Return. - [[User:Singularity|Singularity]] ([[User talk:Singularity|talk]]) 02:11, 28 April 2026 (EDT) ]
::::The Nexus Prime thing really feels like a matter of OP just not liking this one toy tbh, I really haven't seen a lot of people complaining about it ([[User:FortressMaxxing|FortressMaxxing]] ([[User talk:FortressMaxxing|talk]]) 02:20, 28 April 2026 (EDT))
:::::No, Im fine with Nexus. But yeah, whatever I saw was from illegitimate material floating around, and I probably just...didnt notice people had gotten over it (TvTropes and Emgo mentioning it probably further made me think so despute said sources being as reliable as [[Sideways (Armada)|Sideways]]. Now I feel like I raised this topic that I had no idea how to phrase and now have to live with it...[[User:Poliwag06|Poliwag06]] ([[User talk:Poliwag06|talk]]) 02:28, 28 April 2026 (EDT)
:We are absolutely not mentioning every time some people somewhere bitch about a new toy that's months away. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 01:18, 28 April 2026 (EDT)
::Undeestood.(Sorry I brought it up)[[User:Poliwag06|Poliwag06]] ([[User talk:Poliwag06|talk]]) 01:22, 28 April 2026 (EDT)
:Unless something is a big enough deal that it leads to toys being recalled, it's probably not worth mentioning on the wiki. (Also, that Nexus "controversy" is based on leaks, and you've been here long enough that you should know our stance on leaks.) -- [[User:Cyberlink420|Cyberlink420]] ([[User talk:Cyberlink420|talk]]) 01:26, 28 April 2026 (EDT)


Inspired by some person whining about GoBots on TFWiki this morning on Tumblr, I am going to reiterate my standing offer as publicly as possible:
== Toy entry idea: links to Hasbro Pulse and TakaraTomy Mall entries for modern new releases ==


'''If you are a person who would contribute to a GoBots sister wiki, stand up and be counted. If there's interest, I will create said wiki on ShoutWiki, and set it up with the basic set of templates needed for people to jump in and start making articles for characters, episodes, etc. You'll be able to go about everything exactly as if you were doing it on TFWiki.'''
We have long linked to tfu.info pages at the bottom of toy entries, such as on "[[Shockwave (G1)/toys]]". How about we link to Hasbro Pulse and TakaraTomy Mall listings for modern toys when said listings go up? It may incite more contributors to remember to save snapshots of those relevant webpages on the Internet Archive when the official listings eventually get removed in due course. [[User:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47]] ([[User talk:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|talk]]) 02:56, 7 May 2026 (EDT)
: I can get behind this, I'm usually first to add those individual websites from Takara Tomy when available, if that's a new mandate I can help. –[[User:MahXyme|MahXyme/MahXymal]] ([[User talk:MahXyme|talk]]) 16:56, 9 May 2026 (EDT)


Thanks to my having already done the legwork for the IDW Hasbro Wiki, this will be very simple - just starting the wiki and then importing an XML of all the relevant templates and CSS. I have no particular interest in contributing to a GoBots wiki, but I'm 100% ready and willing to get it running for those who would.


'''DISCLAIMER: If you've read this and don't come forward with your interest, you void any right to bring up the topic of GoBots coverage on TFWiki ever again, lest you be hurled into the hugging sun.'''
== "Canceled media" template==
With the recent creation of the "Canceled video games" category, I can't help but wonder: in the same way that we have a little template for canceled toys, shouldn't we also have one to add to the top of the page of media that was canceled and never saw an official release? Seems like it could come in handy! ([[User:FortressMaxxing|FortressMaxxing]] ([[User talk:FortressMaxxing|talk]]) 12:30, 12 May 2026 (EDT))
:I'm in favor.  Plenty of canned comics and an entire dumped franchise in Transtech to justify it. [[User:MCRG|MCRG]] ([[User talk:MCRG|talk]]) 13:00, 12 May 2026 (EDT)
:Agreed. Definitely something that would be pretty useful for a lot of articles! - [[User:IGEBM13|IGEBM13]] ([[User talk:IGEBM13|talk]]) 22:04, 12 May 2026 (EDT)


--[[User:Jalaguy|Jalaguy]] ([[User talk:Jalaguy|talk]]) 16:42, 4 January 2017 (EST)
== Digging into the Beast Machines/Transtech Era ==
:Hell yeah. [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 16:48, 4 January 2017 (EST)
Just throwing a note in here that I'm getting in contact with some folks who were on the Transformers team during the Beast Machines/Transtech era, so I'll be adding notes, fleshing out some things, and adding design credits where I can. Like with the G2 ad creators, I'll post up the full emails on the relevant discussion pages as I get permission. [[User:MCRG|MCRG]] ([[User talk:MCRG|talk]]) 13:04, 12 May 2026 (EDT)
::I'd like this to exist, but I admittedly won't be of much use other than organizational stuff. [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 16:51, 4 January 2017 (EST)
:Nice, I'm excited to see where this goes! ([[User:FortressMaxxing|FortressMaxxing]] ([[User talk:FortressMaxxing|talk]]) 15:32, 12 May 2026 (EDT))
:::Count me in! [[User:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47]] ([[User talk:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|talk]]) 16:52, 4 January 2017 (EST)
::::Obviously. Though with the caveat that I won't be touching my own stuff, which is a lot of the modern-era bits. --[[User:Jimsorenson|Jimsorenson]] ([[User talk:Jimsorenson|talk]]) 16:56, 4 January 2017 (EST)
::::: I'll do my best to help out. [[User:Grum|Grum]] ([[User talk:Grum|talk]]) 17:17, 4 January 2017 (EST)
::::::This is a great idea and I will help. [[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 19:06, 4 January 2017 (EST)
:::::::I'm in.--[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] ([[User talk:Khajidha|talk]]) 06:59, 5 January 2017 (EST)

Latest revision as of 02:04, 13 May 2026


This is the place for discussion of topics that affect the entire wiki. For less wide-reaching subjects, either use articles' individual talk pages or our Discord server.

Some topics that would ordinarily be here have merited their own pages:

Specific Discussion Subjects
Moving From Wikia:

New Ad Policy:

Bookworm Database-Crash:

Server Move:

Relicensing:

Dealing With Vandalism:

GoBots Sister Wiki:

Wiki Technical Information:


MediaWiki talk:Community Portal/Archive


Binder of Revelation Illustration Credits

[edit]

Okay, don't kill me here, I'm just hoping that the artists who contributed to the Binder fifteen-ish years ago get their proper due since it's out in the open now. I got in touch with the art director of the Binder of Revelation and have a fairly complete list of credits for who did what illustration. Since this isn't actually a published work, how do we go about giving proper illustration credits? Do we even credit anyone? Considering the document itself has no credits, I feel like it's worthwhile that the artists get recognized, even if we aren't putting any images up ourselves. MCRG (talk) 21:37, 25 November 2025 (EST)

I don't think this is objectionable info to note at the least. Saix (talk) 23:03, 25 November 2025 (EST)
For now, maybe put your raw info on a sandbox so we can get a better sense of it? Most of the Binder art I know of was by Ken Christiansen, for instance, so if all but a few pieces are by him, it would seem silly to list them all individually. But I'm guessing it's more varied than that. —wadapan (talk) 00:26, 26 November 2025 (EST)
It's a pretty wide spread, surprisingly. A lot of the pieces are tag team works where Eric Siebenaler did roughs and other artists did the finals, but it's around 5-10 artists without me checking the exact notes at the moment. I'll start getting that together.MCRG (talk) 14:41, 26 November 2025 (EST)
All known credits added. On a side note, is it worth pointing out somewhere that the Binder itself is written in the style of a RPG manual instead of an actual franchise bible? It goes a long way in explaining why it was so quickly disregarded by other creative teams when comparing it to bibles from other franchises or just other series bibles within Transformers on the whole, and the pricetag attached to the project.--MCRG (talk) 15:23, 21 January 2026 (EST)

What are we calling the new "Core" Transformers stuff?

[edit]

So... what should we call the new generically branded "Transformers" toys that have been showing up? (Prime Changers, Smash Changers, Tiny Turbo Changers, maybe more in the future). Should it be a separate new thing or maybe part of Authentics? The Prime Changer Optimus, Bumbleebee, and Megatron were previously added under Authentics, while someone just started using "Transformers (2026)" for the Tiny Turbo Arcee and Elita, which got me thinking that we should probably figure this out soon.
From what I've gathered they all use "TRA Core" in their listing names, but their packaging design seems identical to current Authentics packaging design, also lacking a distinct subtitle and focusing on "Evergreen" characters to start off. Then again, Hasbro homogenizing all their packaging designs in the last year makes it hard to tell if this line is meant to be its own thing. Though it is notable that unlike prior Authentics, this "Core" line is using bigger size classes and is available at bigger retailers like Target instead of dollar stores. –BluJayWarrior (talk) 18:24, 13 January 2026 (EST)

I was JUST adding a section here and rather than rewriting...
Okay just kinda checking in, because thanks to Hasbro's goddamn infuriating thing about not promoting/announcing anything other than the expensive collector crap, the load of sub-line-less not-Authentics "Core" stuff hitting Targets (at least, has anything popped up at Walmart?) is a bit of a "how do we handle this" deal. Both "how much product is there" and "do we treat this as a separate line, as an extension of Authentics despite it not being a 'discount' store line, or what". I'm leaning towards "just list it as its own line with G1 characters unless pretty explicitly otherwise". --M Sipher (talk) 18:30, 13 January 2026 (EST)
Oh right, Walmart. Off memory they do have the Authentics-styled Mega Sting Bumbleebee (could also be considered a "larger price point" I guess). No clue if any listings gave it a separate name like "Core" has. Walmart also has a bunch of merch stuff in Authentics-style packaging like big head helicopters, Dancing Transformers and a giant RC Bumblebee. –BluJayWarrior (talk) 18:57, 13 January 2026 (EST)

Size of the page again

[edit]

This page is getting pretty long again, so could someone archive the last year? Hilfam (talk) 12:03, 22 January 2026 (EST)

Idea for a page?

[edit]

Perhaps a page discussing the various Transformers that have "base modes" as a third form, like Powermaster Prime, Motormaster, etc. It's a major recurring gimmick since G1. DrakeyC (talk) 09:09, 30 January 2026 (EST)

I think a general "base mode" article would make sense, yeah. Saix (talk) 10:19, 30 January 2026 (EST)
seconded. frankly shocked to learn there isn't one already --Arren Meuchel (talk) 11:58, 30 January 2026 (EST)
I think base modes lend themselves better to a category page rather than a full-blown article. What would it even say? “Some Transformers have Base Modes. Here’s a list of all the toys, here’s a list of all the episodes/issues where a base mode appeared.” Cylasbreakdown (talk) 16:51, 4 February 2026 (EST)
I don't see why not. We have articles specifically for Beast mode, Super Mode, attack mode, and transportation mode. For such a prominent feature of Transformers since its early days I'm surprised there doesn't seem to be a specific write-up about city/base modes anywhere, and not even as single mention on the main alternate mode page. Closest I can find is Titan (group)#Alternate modes. —BluJayWarrior (talk) 18:01, 4 February 2026 (EST)
I attempted a sandbox for a Base Mode page long ago, but I stopped since I realized it would require an extensive amount of work to list all fiction usages & differentiate what counts/what does not count not (something I struggled with the Micromasters Transports assorments -MahXyme/MahXymal (talk) 17:53, 5 February 2026 (EST)
Seems like a good start at least. I'd argue for listing "groups" of base modes (Micromaster Stations, Titans Return Leaders, etc.) rather than individual figures --Arren Meuchel (talk) 20:36, 5 February 2026 (EST)

Agreed on the organizational aspects. And, that sandbox is a good start, though yeah, it'd need a lot of work to go through all the toylines and make a comprehensive list. There's also the fact that certain toys with base modes are intended to link to others, some universal and some just one specific bot, so it may be tricky to document when that play feature is prevelant. DrakeyC (talk) 10:35, 18 February 2026 (EST)

About character name translations

[edit]

Um... I'm new here. I have a question, and I'm not sure if this question falls under Help:Official info...

That is, I want to add the translated names of some characters. But I want to know what basis this wiki uses to choose foreign translations. Must the foreign translations be ones used by Hasbro and/or TakaraTomy and their licensees in order to remain on this wiki? Can some of the names translated by fan Chinese translation groups be considered valid? Especially in cases where they were the first to provide a translation for a work (possibly the only one) and fixed certain character names.

There are also some characters (such as Sentinel Maximus) whose works may never be introduced by licensors in certain languages, but they do have a commonly used translated name. Should we include this translated name, or just keep it without a translation in that language?

For example, when IDW comic books were introduced in China, the translation team at the time translated Tarn (G1) as 璇玑湖. So this would count as an authorized translation. However, because this translated name has nothing to do with the original meaning (as well as some other controversies surrounding that Chinese translation group), the more common and widely used Chinese translation for Tarn (G1) is the direct transliteration 塔恩. 璇玑湖 has basically been abandoned. In this case, which translation should we choose?

I suddenly realized that 塔恩 could be used. The packaging of Blokees does indeed call him 塔恩.

Also, does the foreign name used in the product titles by the Hasbro official flagship store count?

Uh, this question might seem a bit silly, or it might come across as a bit strange because I'm speaking English through a translator. But if the existing Wiki rules already cover this issue, please just tell me, thank you.Micheva (talk) 10:18, 12 February 2026 (EST)

This is a fantastic question. I have no authority here so don’t take this as word of law, but I believe that Romanizations on this wiki (which I think is somewhat similar) are case-by-case. The first romanization of Deathsaurus was “Deszarus”, but the page is still titled “Deathsaurus” because that’s what the name actually is supposed to be. (Deathsaurus’ name issues are actually pretty interesting, at least to me, and I’d recommend reading the wiki article’s section on it.) Conversely, Jallguar IS the first romanization used, and the article title, but in that instance I suppose that there isn’t really any convincing reason to use any of the other romanizations we’ve gotten over the years since none of them actually mean anything (it’s just the Japanese word for Jaguar with an extra syllable inserted). I’m rambling. What I would do for foreign names is, stick with the first official translation used, unless you think there’s a compelling reason to use a different one (like what you said with Tarn), and in that case bring it up on the discussion page for the article in question or in the Discord server. Cylasbreakdown (talk) 02:43, 15 February 2026 (EST)
They need to be translations used in official material. That's just the easiest line in the sand we can make. If different translations are used officially, we note them all, barring obvious typos and the such. Saix (talk) 05:22, 15 February 2026 (EST)
Does the name used for the flagship store count? Those works that were not introduced have kept them without translations, right?Micheva (talk) 06:52, 15 February 2026 (EST)

Some publications that contain many translations (such as the Chinese version of DW's MTMTE) I actually don't have the resources for, which is a pity. I have come to realize some issues. For instance, if the translation team used a certain translation term when translating a publication, but later discovered that this term was incorrect, they made the correction in their subsequent fan-based translations. However, since the publication was not re-released after its introduction, the translation term in the authorized merchandise could not be modified. Can we adopt the revised translation term provided by this translation team?

There is another less rigorous question: Does THE translation given by the authorized Chinese translation and introduction team of Chris McFeely's TRANSFORMERS: THE BASICS count?Micheva (talk) 07:07, 15 February 2026 (EST)

THE BASICS, while incredibly informative, is not official, so no, it would not count. Cylasbreakdown (talk) 15:52, 16 February 2026 (EST)
I reiterate, official material only. Mistakes are unfortunate, but that's how it goes and we can't presume unofficial translations will make it into official material. Saix (talk) 17:42, 16 February 2026 (EST)

OK, I will do it this way. Strictly follow the official materials.

And one more question: Can the translation names used by Hasbro's official store be used in this Wiki?Micheva (talk) 23:40, 16 February 2026 (EST)

Material from Hasbro is fine. Saix (talk) 01:50, 17 February 2026 (EST)

So when are we splitting the Legends World characters off?

[edit]

It made sense to keep them together when Legends first started as Jungle Animals in Decidedly Non-Jungle Situations, and this wasn't worth pursuing before now since it'd be just moving the furniture around. But the lore got deeper and now with New Legends as ongoing fiction I think it's worth looking at again. As much as Legends World is treated as its own dimension, it is fundamentally just a location easily accessible from the JG1 timeline populated with clones* of Transformers from the wider continuity that exists around it. And when we write pages for duplicate characters who co-exist, do we not typically split them off? If that's the yardstick, several Legends Worlders interact with or refer to their JG1 selves, including Rattrap, Rhinox, Waspinator, Arcee, and T-AI. Leo Prime even moves in with Lio Convoy, and keeping those same dudes on the same page is complicating the already complex timeline presented by "Age of Primes". — TheLastGherkin (talk) 12:44, 3 March 2026 (EST) *"clones" is a simpler term for these guys than "magically created lifeforms in a telepathic dream world based on real people from 300 years in the future" but same diff

It's always been strange to me that they weren't split off already. Having them on the same page is extremely confusing. I'd say go for it. --Arren Meuchel (talk) 12:57, 3 March 2026 (EST)
Personally I think this might be overthinking things. I'd agree that it's not quite 1 to 1 with other cross dimension stuff, but functionally Legends Rattrap is a version of the Beast Wars character even if he is in this weird pocket dimension type thing, and ever single "native" to the dimension we see is basically just a comedic version of a pre-existing character. And we've always kept cross dimensional stories with versions of the same character on the same page (Universe, TransTech, et cetera). It makes things complicated, sure, but JG1 stuff has been like that for nearly two decades now. Escargon (talk) 13:00, 3 March 2026 (EST)
For my money, there's just so much with the Legends idiots now, and there's going to keep being more of it, so we'd be best off siloing them into their own pages and not having to think about them any more. Universe and TransTech stories that had the characters interacting were generally one-offs or short runs. This is a Cloud or Galvatron II situation, to me. --Broadside (talk) 13:45, 3 March 2026 (EST)
I am on the record as considering reader experience our prime directive and this would be such a drastic improvement to the readability of our coverage of the Legends rat's nest that I've been meaning to suggest it for years. Consider me emphatically in favor. --AzimuthAcolyte (talk) 20:12, 3 March 2026 (EST)
I think I'm also generally leaning towards "this is already complicated and it's just going to get more complicated so let's detangle this shit sooner rather than later." -- Cyberlink420 (talk) 20:19, 3 March 2026 (EST)
Fine with this idea. Are we using Japanese names since those characters have never shown up in material with Hasbro names? Saix (talk) 20:31, 3 March 2026 (EST)
That feels unnecessarily pedantic. --Broadside (talk) 22:16, 3 March 2026 (EST)
One could make the argument that it's too steeped in Japanese fan culture/terminology to use the Hasbro names, but I really only care about the human characters having Japanese names (because they're normal people living in Tokyo and wouldn't be named things like "T-AI"). Saix (talk) 22:25, 3 March 2026 (EST)
Also, I think Roadbuster, Whirl, and Windblade can stay as they are, since all three are meant to be the main JG1 versions of those characters anyway. Saix (talk) 22:37, 3 March 2026 (EST)
I'm theoretically in favour of Japanese names, since it would improve legibility of say, the time Rattle and Rattrap teamed up – and we're absolutely keeping Lio Convoy, since Leo Prime has gone through a textual name change – BUT: characters with toys, at least, had both the Japanese and Hasbro names on their packaging. It would be inconsistent to have Rattrap and Waspinator and Optimus Primal alongside Cheetus and — I can't think of another example, but I'm interrupting this train of thought because I CAN think of Optimus Minor being made Primal's son on the basis of Beast Convoy's western name. And how many minor guys like, I dunno, Build Boy, are named in dialogue? We could always title the article Wedge and slap a Noname-uncomfirmed on that bad boy like how we did with Shattered Glass in the distant past.
Also, what are we feeling is best for a disambig? (Legends)? (LG)? (LW)? — TheLastGherkin (talk) 04:43, 4 March 2026 (EST)
Or we could go with the Kre-O approach of "major characters get their own pages, cameos don't" I GUESS — TheLastGherkin (talk) 04:53, 4 March 2026 (EST)
Minor is only called "Minor" in Legends, so he wouldn't get the full name. I vote (Legends). Saix (talk) 05:01, 4 March 2026 (EST)
I second the "(Legends)" motion. It's the name of the franchise these character debuted in, in the name of the world they live in, and it's one word. We don't put Masterforce characters at "MF", for instance, and "Legends" isn't even a compound word that could be abbreviated. --Sabrblade (talk) 16:32, 4 March 2026 (EST)
Doing a cursory sweep we appear to have already used "(Legends)" for a bazillion mobile game events such that it might be prudent to avoid that one. My two cents would be to either use the "(LG)" abbreviation from the packaging/story titles/etc or straight up spell out "(Legends World)" for absolute maximum clarity. --AzimuthAcolyte (talk) 17:50, 4 March 2026 (EST)
I'm leaning towards LG: it's on every toy box and in the title of the vast majority of chapters. Plus, Deadlock uses it in-universe. And it's shorter! — TheLastGherkin (talk) 18:02, 4 March 2026 (EST)
"Legends" is also spoken in-universe countless times all throughout the Legends manga series, even in the most recent End of G1 Universe comic starring the green Lio Convoy. The reason "LG" is on every toy box is because it's part of each toy's ID number, which we have never let dictate any of our disambiguation tags. Otherwise, we'd be using "(BT)" instead of "(Binaltech)", "(MP)" instead of "(Masterpiece)", "(UN)" instead of "(United)", "(TG)" instead of "(Generations)", "(TAV)" instead of "(Adventure)", "(PP)" for Power of the Primes instead of "(POTP)", "(SG)" instead of "(Siege)", "(TCV)" instead of "(Cyberverse)", "(ER)" instead of "(Earthrise)", "(KD)" instead of "(Kingdom)", "(TL)" instead of "(Legacy)", etc. That Transformers Legends mobile game (which has been dead for over a decade, even) that "(Legends)" is currently being used for is a nonissue when "(Legends)" is also currently being used for things from the Transformers Legends anthology book, particularly Susan (Legends). And "(Legends)" has already been in use for things from the Legends manga, too, like Groundshaker (Legends), Synapse (Legends), Duncan (Legends), and Plasma Energy Chamber (Legends). It's no different from how we use "(RID)" for things from both the 2001 and 2025 franchises, "(Universe)" for things from both the 2003 and 2008 franchises, and "(Generations)" for things from both the pre-Combiner Wars toyline and from the series of Japanese guidebooks. --Sabrblade (talk) 00:37, 5 March 2026 (EST)
Yes, the principle was always "least disambiguation necessary for titles". A particular disambiguation is fine to be used by different things. Saix (talk) 02:13, 5 March 2026 (EST)
Speaking personally I cannot say I am terribly invested in any specific disambig so if y'all feel that strongly about "(Legends)," so be it. --AzimuthAcolyte (talk) 15:00, 5 March 2026 (EST)
Historically I've leaned more in the direction of "this feels like putting these dumb animals on too much of a pedestal", given the meta-importance that page splits tend to imply to the wiki's audience, but I find the "these are functionally clones who exist within JG1 continuity specifically, not just 'normal' alternate versions of the characters" framing pretty compelling, so I'm surprising myself by saying I wouldn't be opposed to a split at this point. Making stuff like multiple Lios Convoy interacting less insane to write about is definitely a bonus too. Jalaguy (talk) 04:34, 4 March 2026 (EST)
Oh, also, and I hope it would go without saying, but obviously the toys that technically represent Transformerised Legends World guys would need to go on both pages (which I think we're already doing anyway for cases like the Targetmasters that are actually technically Kiss Players and Beastformers and stuff). Jalaguy (talk) 04:41, 4 March 2026 (EST)

Thinking about it more, the Galvatron II example is more presuasive to me; a suite style situation would be fine. As for names, I don't really care about T-AI but for any of the Transformers I think that's a bit much. Escargon (talk) 08:08, 4 March 2026 (EST)

Having gone through Category:Legends World natives and Category:Legends World humans, if we apply the Kre-O Rule of Notability, that gives us the following:

  • Split: Airazor, Arcee, Big Convoy, Bighorn, Blackarachnia, Cheetor, Dinobot, Lio Convoy, Lio Junior, Megatron, Nightscream, Optimus Minor, Optimus Primal, Rattrap, Rhinox, Scorponok, Scuba, Scylla, Silverbolt, Stampy, Starscream, Tarantulas, Terrorsaur, Tigatron, Waspinator, Nightbeat, T-AI
  • Lump: Roadbuster, Whirl, basically every real person making a cameo
  • Small roles: Archadis, Armordillo, BB, Break, Bump, Colada, Diver, Drill Nuts, Gas Skunk, Guiledart, Heinrad, Ikard, Inferno, Longrack, Magmatron, Megastorm, Kobanzametarō, Prowl, Quickstrike, Rampage, Randy, Ravage, Saberback, Sling, Star Upper, Tasmania Kid, Transmutate, Venom, Wedge, Wolfang, Kelly, Kenneth Onishi, Koji Onishi
  • TBD: Botanica (doesn't have a write-up yet), Buzz Saw (does not appear in JG1 elsewhere), Savage and Noble, Tank Drones (do we split subgroups?)

TheLastGherkin (talk) 09:02, 4 March 2026 (EST)

The Kre-O thing is because some characters (in fiction or toys) can't be exclusively slotted into G1 or movie buckets since they shift design cues between them. I think it's easier to just be consistent with the Legends gremlin people (other than real people cameos). Sensible to keep the sentient toys (Mini-Cons, Encore Big Convoy) and the three JG1 inductees (Roadbuster, Whirl, Windblade) on their respective character pages, I think. Like Wolfang/Howlinger, Buzz Saw exists in JG1 somewhere off-camera, since they got his toy. I don't think Tank Drone needs another page; it's a mass-produced bodytype that can cover instances across universes, not a specific person. Saix (talk) 09:19, 4 March 2026 (EST)
I'm somewhere in the middle between "splitting them off the main article would help improve readability, yes," and "splitting them off entirely feels a bit too far since all of them are essentially just different versions of the main Beast Wars et al characters", so I think going the aforementioned route of suiting them would be the cleanest solution. Keeps them joined at the hip with the main versions that they're basically new versions of, while also giving them their own webpages to tidy up readability on the main pages. The Galvatron II analogy is very apropos in this case. --Sabrblade (talk) 10:01, 4 March 2026 (EST)
Coming back to this with refreshed knowledge, Botanica is split, Buzz Saw is small roles (which is now also split), Savage and Noble are split both from Noble (BM) and from each other, and Rhinox/Tankor can go on the same page. — TheLastGherkin (talk) 18:02, 4 March 2026 (EST)

So uh. I've come around on the split pages. However...I don't think completely removing any reference to them on the Beast Wars pages themselves is particularly helpful? Whether it be a suite or a "see this article for more information" I don't mind, but there should be some reference since like Sabrblade says, they are just comedic versions of the Beast Wars guys. Escargon (talk) 07:37, 6 March 2026 (EST)

Maybe do the disambiguation like this? Cylasbreakdown (talk) 14:09, 6 March 2026 (EST)
This article is about the Beast Wars Maximal. For his Legends World counterpart, see Rattrap (Legends). For a list of other meanings, see Rattrap (disambiguation).


Alright, I've decided that for now I'm just going to add a note and a link mostly because I have little patience when it comes to formatting suite links. It's going to be along these lines:

Due to the unique nature of Legends place within JG1 continuity, we've opted to separate out this version of the character into its own micro-page. See [article link] for more details.

If anyone has any objections or comments, leave them below. Otherwise I'll just implement it tomorrow. Escargon (talk) 19:28, 6 March 2026 (EST)

I don't think this is necessary, but this can be phrased in-universe if we really need it. ("In the [[Zamojin (species)|Zamojin]]-created [[Legends World]], its [[Character (Legends)|Character]]'s existence formed based on Character." or something around that.) Saix (talk) 19:55, 6 March 2026 (EST)
Yeah, I like that much better. If nothing else it draws way less attention to itself. --Broadside (talk) 21:55, 6 March 2026 (EST)
Seconding Saix that this feels unnecessary, seconding Broadside that Saix's version is more straightforward if we must. --AzimuthAcolyte (talk) 22:12, 6 March 2026 (EST)
My thinking is that treating them as completely separate from the regular versions is not really accurate/a bit "inside baseball. Like I said at the start, they aren't quite the same as different counterparts from another universe, sure, but they are still very specifically comedic versions of the Beast Wars characters, down to the fact that they briefly turn into them late in the series. It's why I find the Galvatron II comparison more compelling for accessibility reasons (frankly, the main Galvatron article could also use a note explaining why he's separate too). As for the wording, again I think the in-universe thing is a bit inside baseball, and not clear immediately to users who have no idea what Legends is. If people have suggestions for a better way of wording a precise explanation, I'm all for it, but I still think the intent of my suggestion is more accessible to readers. I'm also still very open to suiting the articles, but I've always struggled with the way templates work, so if anyone else is up for the task, I'm all for it. Escargon (talk) 22:27, 6 March 2026 (EST)
If I'm being honest, I would prefer suites too, for all the reasons that have been given, and because the Legends World natives are stated by Leo Prime to be the "bunshin" (分身) of the normal BW characters, denoting an inherent connection between them: 君達レジェンズ世界のビースト市民は我らG1世界のビースト戦士の分身だ. 今こそ! その内なる野獣を全て呼び覚ますんだ. But if others feel that strongly enough against suites to overrule that preference, I can accept the little note proposal instead. --Sabrblade (talk) 00:01, 7 March 2026 (EST)
For what it's worth, I'd planned to give Legends World headings to characters who exist fictionally in that world, like so, to cover their "fictional" appearances. — TheLastGherkin (talk) 05:58, 7 March 2026 (EST)
That was what I figured we would have as well in those cases; I know there's plenty of them who do show up fictionally or as toys just based on my memories. Escargon (talk) 08:11, 7 March 2026 (EST)
While attempting to get into the endgame metaphysical hooey connecting the Legends World natives to the Transformers of JG1 on every individual character article still feels like it would do more harm than good intelligibility-wise to me, I will say that after sitting with it a while I would not be opposed to making some kind of centralized "Legends World native" article laying it all out in detail and then linking out to it everywhere. --AzimuthAcolyte (talk) 16:13, 7 March 2026 (EST)
I should clarify, my thinking is that there are bound to be users who will see images from the comics, recognize instinctively that they are comedy versions of the Beast Wars characters, and go to those pages and be confused why they aren't there. Yes, they could go to the disambiguation page, but I've always felt that we should optimize things for the least amount of clicking. What separates this from a Cloud type situation to me is that there are enough vagaries there that I understand the argument to split them out (the lore of that depiction of Cybertron, things like Grimlock's backstory); the Legends characters and a lot of the jokes around them exist solely in the context of either the JP Beast Wars and Beast Machines dubs (Silverbolt's depiction, Airazor and Nightscream's whole...thing, Depth Charge's fish gun thing being a character that can talk), or the BWII cartoon characters (Bighorn's infatuation with Scylla, Big Convoy being a teacher at a school as a comedic version of him as a military instructor). In-fiction, sure, they are kind of clones, but it's not the same thing as say, the Optimus Prime clone from the cartoon, because of the metaphysical stuff involved. I think that potentially presenting them as having no connection would not be fully honest. Escargon (talk) 16:28, 7 March 2026 (EST)
I don’t think we need a dedicated “Legends World native” page, the existing Legends World article already sums it up pretty nicely. We could direct people there. Cylasbreakdown (talk) 18:02, 7 March 2026 (EST)
Although, if such a page for the Legends World inhabitants were to be made, the in-story name used for those people is "Legends World citizen" (レジェンズ世界の市民 Rejenzu sekai no shimin) with those based on beast-moded characters (as in, those who possess Beast Power) referred to as either "Animal-type citizens" (動物型の市民 Dōbutsu-gata no shimin) or "Beast citizens" (ビースト市民 Bīsuto shimin). --Sabrblade (talk) 14:47, 8 March 2026 (EDT)

Out of date MediaWiki

[edit]

So, uh, this place is on MediaWiki 1.19.20. The 1.19.* branch went EOL back in 2015, and isn't even the last 1.19.* (which was 1.19.24). That dpesn't seem safe for y'all.

(For context, the current LTS is 1.39.17, which is the oldest supported branch. The most current version is 1.45.1.) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Hello Goodbye (talkcontribs) 2026-03-14T08:31.

irc needed

[edit]

need an irc channel populated by at least 1 wiki admin. when i tried to register, the dnsbl identified me as open proxy and prevented registration. where i am from, dynamic ips and nat/network address translation is used alot so legitimate ips are mistakenly identified as such. there was no way to contact any admin about this until i lucked out. i suggest an irc channel on rizon because rizon provides cloak for all by default -- Mussharraf Hossen Shoikot (talk) 10:16, 7 April 2026 (EDT)

We have no intention of implementing an IRC channel due to the required amount of time needed to maintain and monitor it outweighing its uses. There are no shortage of other ways to get in contact with wiki personnel, such as through social media or our public Discord server. -- Cyberlink420 (talk) 16:19, 15 April 2026 (EDT)
social media and discord currently unavailable for me. irc can be a side method without needing much monitor and maintaining if one is willing to use it as that. only need 1 admin on it. if a channel not possible, have you or any other admin register on rizon irc using /msg nickserv register command and i will be able to send memo which they can later read using /msg memoserv read command and respond to using /msg memoserv send command -- Mussharraf Hossen Shoikot (talk) 10:52, 16 April 2026 (EDT)
That still requires resources and time that we might not have to maintain and monitor an IRC channel just for a possible small number of users, which is not beneficial in the long run. When you say "social media and discord currently unavailable" for you, do you mean that your ISP is blocking certain sites? (We also have a Bluesky account.) --Lonegamer78 (talk) 08:18, 17 April 2026 (EDT)
connecting to rizon irc, registering and sending memos do not require any channel. why cannot any admins do this? i send memo to registered admin on irc, they can see it next time they login to irc -- Mussharraf Hossen Shoikot (talk) 04:47, 18 April 2026 (EDT)
I'm sorry, but who uses IRC in 2026? S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47 (talk) 06:04, 18 April 2026 (EDT)
I mean I'm sure some small niche communities use it, but that's neither here nor there. The primary issue is that this wiki is a voluntary, in-your-own-time deal, even for the admins. Nobody's getting paid to do this, we all have other things going on in our lives. The Discord is itself something only some of us keep tabs on, and not even every portion of it. You're asking people who are already pretty stretched to keep track of something else just for you. I'm sorry, but that's not feasible. --M Sipher (talk) 16:21, 18 April 2026 (EDT)
check what i said about memoserv. memoserv does not require much tracking, only logging in. can there not be 1 admin registered on rizon server? -- Mussharraf Hossen Shoikot (talk) 10:43, 19 April 2026 (EDT)
You have already been told no and given reasons why by three different administrators. The decision is not going to change. Please drop the subject. -- Cyberlink420 (talk) 12:14, 19 April 2026 (EDT)
how about this? no channels. 1 login to rizon server every 120 hours or higher intervals to see if i have sent any memos. possible? -- Mussharraf Hossen Shoikot (talk) 10:42, 20 April 2026 (EDT)
I legitimately do not understand why you expect admins to bend over your request on building an infrastructure that you're tacitly admitting only you would use, lmao (FortressMaxxing (talk) 10:59, 20 April 2026 (EDT))
No. --M Sipher (talk) 12:10, 20 April 2026 (EDT)

When does controversy surrounding a figure prove worthy enough to mention?

[edit]

Thinking about the whole Nexus and ss86 astro situation rn, it kinda feels like theyre the elephants in the room that we probably have to acknowledge. However, they're not documented. Makes me wonder: any criteroa I should follow seeing these types of situations before its eligible to memtion here?Poliwag06 (talk) 22:37, 27 April 2026 (EDT)

I think you need to stop giving overinflated importance to opinions you see online. Saix (talk) 22:42, 27 April 2026 (EDT)
Nobody cares, Moby. --M Sipher (talk) 23:35, 27 April 2026 (EDT)
...I guess I'll take that as "never allowed" then.Poliwag06 (talk) 23:40, 27 April 2026 (EDT)
What controversy is this supposed to be? S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47 (talk) 00:32, 28 April 2026 (EDT)
The complaints about Nexus not being a combiner and the many, many criticisms of SS86 Astrotrain about inaccuracies/proportions etc. (Ok maybe the latter can somewhat be ignored because its just people critiquing his flaws once they got him in hand+stock images+they dont like how he looks compared to Siege).Poliwag06 (talk) 00:52, 28 April 2026 (EDT)
People were whining about Nexus info from leaks before the post on Mark Maher's personal Instagram account and actual announcements by Hasbro confirming that yes, Nexus is a combiner frame compatible figure that can fit into the AOTP Superion, and yes, Nexus is going to be a full combiner later in 2027, we just don't know what that'll look like and I hope it's a full commander class combiner frame and four deluxe limbs (neither are confirmed as of this minute). The discourse over him not being a combiner is from stolen and unreliable info, so why add more fuel to a flame that people started themselves less than a week before the actual reveal of the Voyager figure? -[ Singularity (talk) 02:11, 28 April 2026 (EDT) ]
Is this just about the fact that SS86 Astrotrain looks like ass? If so... I'll be the dissenting voice here and say that yes, there should be space to maybe mention the general reception of a given figure into a toy section, as long as it reflects the broader evaluation of the community and doesn't just become an editor's sole personal gripes with a given toy. With SS86 Astrotrain, I do think the consensus is pretty settled at least (though I have no idea about what's up with Nexus Prime). (FortressMaxxing (talk) 01:00, 28 April 2026 (EDT))
Nexus complaints are mostly hes not a gestalt (source: prematurely released images) and his alt mode being a flying brick, though it has settled down a bit when people got their hands on him. I think the former may or may not be connected to why they had to post that pic that he had a torso mode (which is apparently not shown on the box or called out, much like Sideways' head swapping).Poliwag06 (talk) 01:05, 28 April 2026 (EDT)
You yourself said "source: prematurely released images" so why are you complaining over stolen pictures that had little to no context to them since they were leaks? Most if not all of the complaints about the figure being "not a gestalt" were dissuaded with the info given to us from the official reveal video (linked in the references of AOTP Nexus' article) and Mark Maher's post of Nexus wearing Superion (also linked in the references of AOTP Nexus' article). Also, "his alt mode being a flying brick" is a matter of taste. Nexus fits perfectly with my Diaclone Jumpstarter redecos as Topspin and Twin Twist are now combiners thanks to Titans Return. - Singularity (talk) 02:11, 28 April 2026 (EDT) ]
The Nexus Prime thing really feels like a matter of OP just not liking this one toy tbh, I really haven't seen a lot of people complaining about it (FortressMaxxing (talk) 02:20, 28 April 2026 (EDT))
No, Im fine with Nexus. But yeah, whatever I saw was from illegitimate material floating around, and I probably just...didnt notice people had gotten over it (TvTropes and Emgo mentioning it probably further made me think so despute said sources being as reliable as Sideways. Now I feel like I raised this topic that I had no idea how to phrase and now have to live with it...Poliwag06 (talk) 02:28, 28 April 2026 (EDT)
We are absolutely not mentioning every time some people somewhere bitch about a new toy that's months away. --M Sipher (talk) 01:18, 28 April 2026 (EDT)
Undeestood.(Sorry I brought it up)Poliwag06 (talk) 01:22, 28 April 2026 (EDT)
Unless something is a big enough deal that it leads to toys being recalled, it's probably not worth mentioning on the wiki. (Also, that Nexus "controversy" is based on leaks, and you've been here long enough that you should know our stance on leaks.) -- Cyberlink420 (talk) 01:26, 28 April 2026 (EDT)

Toy entry idea: links to Hasbro Pulse and TakaraTomy Mall entries for modern new releases

[edit]

We have long linked to tfu.info pages at the bottom of toy entries, such as on "Shockwave (G1)/toys". How about we link to Hasbro Pulse and TakaraTomy Mall listings for modern toys when said listings go up? It may incite more contributors to remember to save snapshots of those relevant webpages on the Internet Archive when the official listings eventually get removed in due course. S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47 (talk) 02:56, 7 May 2026 (EDT)

I can get behind this, I'm usually first to add those individual websites from Takara Tomy when available, if that's a new mandate I can help. –MahXyme/MahXymal (talk) 16:56, 9 May 2026 (EDT)


"Canceled media" template

[edit]

With the recent creation of the "Canceled video games" category, I can't help but wonder: in the same way that we have a little template for canceled toys, shouldn't we also have one to add to the top of the page of media that was canceled and never saw an official release? Seems like it could come in handy! (FortressMaxxing (talk) 12:30, 12 May 2026 (EDT))

I'm in favor. Plenty of canned comics and an entire dumped franchise in Transtech to justify it. MCRG (talk) 13:00, 12 May 2026 (EDT)
Agreed. Definitely something that would be pretty useful for a lot of articles! - IGEBM13 (talk) 22:04, 12 May 2026 (EDT)

Digging into the Beast Machines/Transtech Era

[edit]

Just throwing a note in here that I'm getting in contact with some folks who were on the Transformers team during the Beast Machines/Transtech era, so I'll be adding notes, fleshing out some things, and adding design credits where I can. Like with the G2 ad creators, I'll post up the full emails on the relevant discussion pages as I get permission. MCRG (talk) 13:04, 12 May 2026 (EDT)

Nice, I'm excited to see where this goes! (FortressMaxxing (talk) 15:32, 12 May 2026 (EDT))